Forinstance，theexclusiverighttothelandforpurposesof
cultivationdoesnotimplyanexclusiverighttoitforpurposes
ofaccess;andnosuchrightoughttoberecognised，exceptto
theextentnecessarytoprotecttheproduceagainstdamage，and
theowner’sprivacyagainstinvasion。ThepretensionoftwoDukes
toshutupapartoftheHighlands，andexcludetherestof
mankindfrommanysquaremilesofmountainscenerytoprevent
disturbancetowildanimals，isanabuse;itexceedsthe
legitimateboundsoftherightoflandedproperty。Whenlandis
notintendedtobecultivated，nogoodreasoncaningeneralbe
givenforitsbeingprivatepropertyatall;andifanyoneis
permittedtocallithis，heoughttoknowthatheholdsitby
sufferanceofthecommunity，andonanimpliedconditionthathis
ownership，sinceitcannotpossiblydothemanygood，atleast
shallnotdeprivethemofany，whichcouldhavederivedfromthe
landifithadbeenunappropriated。Eveninthecaseof
cultivatedland，amanwhom，thoughonlyoneamongmillions，the
lawpermitstoholdthousandsofacresashissingleshare，is
notentitledtothinkthatallthisisgiventohimtouseand
abuse，anddealwithasifitconcernednobodybuthimself。The
rentsorprofitswhichhecanobtainfromitareathissole
disposal;butwithregardtotheland，ineverythingwhichhe
doeswithit，andineverythingwhichheabstainsfromdoing，he
ismorallybound，andshouldwheneverthecaseadmitsbelegally
compelled，tomakehisinterestandpleasureconsistentwiththe
publicgood。Thespeciesatlargestillretains，ofitsoriginal
claimtothesoiloftheplanetwhichitinhabits，asmuchasis
compatiblewiththepurposesforwhichithaspartedwiththe
remainder。
7。Besidespropertyintheproduceoflabour，andpropertyin
land，thereareotherthingswhichareorhavebeensubjectsof
property，inwhichnoproprietaryrightsoughttoexistatall。
Butasthecivilizedworldhasingeneralmadeupitsmindon
mostofthese，thereisnonecessityfordwellingontheminthis
place。Attheheadofthem，ispropertyinhumanbeings。Itis
almostsuperfluoustoobserve，thatthisinstitutioncanhaveno
placeinanysocietyevenpretendingtobefoundedonjustice，or
onfellowshipbetweenhumancreatures。But，iniquitousasitis，
yetwhenthestatehasexpresslylegalizedit，andhumanbeings，
forgenerations，havebeenbought，sold，andinheritedunder
sanctionoflaw，itisanotherwrong，inabolishingtheproperty，
nottomakefullcompensation。Thiswrongwasavoidedbythe
greatmeasureofjusticein1833，oneofthemostvirtuousacts，
aswellasthemostpracticallybeneficent，everdone
collectivelybyanation。Otherexamplesofpropertywhichought
nottohavebeencreated，arepropertiesinpublictrusts;such
asjudicialofficesundertheoldFrenchregime，andthe
heritablejurisdictionswhich，incountriesnotwhollyemerged
fromfeudality，passwiththeland。Ourowncountryaffords，as
casesinpoint，thatofacommissioninthearmy，andofan
advowson，orrightofnominationtoanecclesiasticalbenefice。A
propertyisalsosometimescreatedinarightoftaxingthe
public;inamonopoly，forinstance，orotherexclusive
privilege。Theseabusesprevailmostinsemibarbarouscountries
butarenotwithoutexampleinthemostcivilized。InFrance
thereareseveralimportanttradesandprofessions，including
notaries，attorneys，brokers，appraisers，printers，and（until
lately）bakersandbutchers，ofwhichthenumbersarelimitedby
law。Thebrevetorprivilegeofoneofthepermittednumber
consequentlybringsahighpriceinthemarket。Whensuchisthe
case，compensationprobablycouldnotwithjusticeberefused，on
theabolitionoftheprivilege。Thereareothercasesinwhich
thiswouldbemoredoubtful。Thequestionwouldturnuponwhat，
inthepeculiarcircumstances，wassufficienttoconstitute
prescription;andwhetherthelegalrecognitionwhichtheabuse
hadobtained，wassufficienttoconstituteitaninstitution，or
amountedonlytoanoccasionallicence。Itwouldbeabsurdto
claimcompensationforlossescausedbychangesinatariff，a
thingconfessedlyvariablefromyeartoyear;orformonopolies
likethosegrantedtoindividualsbytheTudors，favoursofa
despoticauthority，whichthepowerthatgavewascompetentat
anytimetorecal。
Somuchontheinstitutionofproperty，asubjectofwhich，
forthepurposesofpoliticaleconomy，itwasindispensableto
treat，butonwhichwecouldnotusefullyconfineourselvesto
economicalconsiderations。Wehavenowtoinquireonwhat
principlesandwithwhatresultsthedistributionoftheproduce
oflandandlabouriseffected，undertherelationswhichthis
institutioncreatesamongthedifferentmembersofthecommunity。
NOTES:
1。See，foradmirableillustrationsofthisandmanykindred
points，MrMaine’sprofoundworkonAncientLawanditsrelation
toModernIdeas。
2。Inthecaseofcapitalemployed，inthehandsoftheowner
himself，incarryingonanyoftheoperationsofindustry，there
arestronggroundsforleavingtohimthepowerofbequeathingto
onepersonthewholeofthefundsactuallyengagedinasingle
enterprise。Itiswellthatheshouldbeenabledtoleavethe
enterpriseunderthecontrolofwhicheverofhisheirsheregards
asbestfittedtoconductitvirtuouslyandefficiently:andthe
necessity（verfrequentandinconvientundertheFrenchlaw）
wouldbethusobviated，ofbreakingupamanufacturingor
commercialestablishmentatthedeathofitschief。Inlike
manner，itshouldbeallowedtoaproprietorwholeavestooneof
hissuccessorsthemoreburthenofkeepingupanancestralwho
leavestooneofhissuccessorsthemoralburthernofkeepingup
anancestralmansionandparkorpleasure—ground，tobestowalong
withthemasmuchotherpropertyasisrequiredfortheir
sufficientmaintenance。
3。\"Munificentbequestsanddonationsforpublicpurposes，
whethercharitableoreducation，formastrikingfeatureinthe
modernhistoryoftheUnitedStates，andexpeciallyofNew
England。Notonlyisitcommonforrichcapitaliststoleaveby
willaportionoftheirfortunetowardstheendowmentofnational
institutions，butindividualsduringtheirlifetimemake
magnificentgrantsofmoneyforthesameobjects。Thereishere
nocompulsorylawfortheequalpartitionofpropertyamong
children，asinFrance，andontheotherhand，nocustomof
entailorprimogeniture，asinEngland，sothattheaffluentfeel
themselvesatlibertytosharetheirwealthbetweentheirkindred
andthepublic;itbeingimpossibletofoundafamily，and
parentshavingfrequentlythehappinessofseeingalltheir
childrenwellprovidedforandindependentlongbeforetheir
death。Ihaveseenalistofbequestsanddonationsmadeduring
thelastthirtyyearsforthebenefitofreligious，charitable，
andliteraryinstitutionsinthestateofMassachusettsalone，
andtheyamountedtonolessasumthansixmillionsofdollars，
ormorethanamillionsterling。\"——Lyell’sTravelsinAmerica，
vol。i。p。263。
4。\"Cequidonnaital’hommel’intelligenceetlaconstancedans
sestravaus，quiluifaisaitdirigertousseseffortsversunbut
utileasarace，c’etaitlesentimentdelaperpetuite。Les
terrainslesplusfertilessonttoujoursceuxqueleseauxont
deposeslelongdeleurcours，maiscesontaussiceuxqu’elles
menacentdeleursinodationsouqu’ellescorrompentpardes
marecages。Aveclagarantiedelaperetuite，l’hommeentrepritde
longsetpeniblestravauxpourdonnerauxmarecagesun
ecoulement，poureleverdesdiguescontrelesinondations，pour
repartirpardescanauxd’arrosementdeseauxfertilisantessur
lesmemeschampsquelesmemeseauxcondamnaientalasterilite。
Souslamemegarantie，l’homme，nesecontentantplusdesfruits
annuelsdelaterre，ademeleparmilavegetationsauvageles
plantesvivaces，lesarbustes，lesarbresquipouvaientluietre
utiles，illesaperfectionnesparlaculture，ilachangeen
quelquesorteleuressence，etilamultiplies。Parmilesfruits，
eneffet，onenreconnaitquedessieclesdecultureontseulspu
ameneralaperfectionqu’ilsontatteinteaujourd’hui，tandis
qued’autresonteteimportesdesregionslespluslointaines。
L’hommeenmemetempsaouvertlaterrejusqu’aunegrande
profondeur，pourrenouvelersonsol，etlefertiliserparle
melangedesespartiesetlesimpressionsdel’air;itafixesur
lescollineslaterrequis’enechappait，etilacouvertlaface
entieredelacampagned’unevegetationpartoutabondante，et
partoutabondante，etpartoututilealaracehumanine。Parmises
travaux，ilyenad’autresdontsesderniersneveuxjouiront
encouredansplusieurssiecles。tousontconcouruaaugmenterla
forceproductivedelanature，adonneralaracehumaineun
revenuinfinimentplusabondant，unrevenudontuneportion
considerableestconsommeeparceuxquin’ontpointpartala
proprieteterritoriale，etquicependantn’auraientpointtrouve
denourrituresanscepartagedusolquisemplelesavoir
desherites。\"Sismondi，Etudesurl’EconomiePolitique，Troisieme
Essai，DelaRichesseTerritoriale。
5。Imustbegthereadertobearinmindthatthisparagraphwas
writtenmorethantwentyyearsago。Sowonderfularethechanges，
bothmoralandeconomical，takingplaceinourage，that，without
perpetuallyre—writingaworklikethepresent，itisimpossible
tokeepupwiththem。
ThePrinciplesofPoliticalEconomy
byJohnStuartMill
Book2，Chapter3
OftheClassesAmongWhomtheProduceisDistributed
1。Privatepropertybeingassumedasafact，wehavenextto
enumeratethedifferentclassesofpersonstowhomitgivesrise;
whoseconcurrence，oratleastwhosepermission，isnecessaryto
production，andwhoarethereforeabletostipulateforashare
oftheproduce。Wehavetoinquire，accordingtowhatlawsthe
producedistributesitselfamongtheseclasses，bythe
spontaneousactionoftheinterestsofthoseconcerned:after
which，afurtherquestionwillbe，whateffectsareormightbe
producedbylaws，institutions，andmeasuresofgovernment，in
supersedingormodifyingthatspontaneousdistribution。
Thethreerequisitesofproduction，ashasbeensooften
repeated，arelabour，capital，andland:understandingby
capital，themeansandapplianceswhicharetheaccumulated
resultsofpreviouslabour，andbyland，thematerialsand
instrumentssuppliedbynature，whethercontainedintheinterior
oftheearth，orconstitutingitssurface。Sinceeachofthese
elementsofproductionmaybeseparatelyappropriated，the
industrialcommunitymaybeconsideredasdividedinto
landowners，capitalists，andproductivelabourers。Eachofthese
classes，assuch，obtainsashareoftheproduce:nootherperson
orclassobtainsanything，exceptbyconcessionfromthem。The
remainderofthecommunityis，infact，supportedattheir
expense，giving，ifanyequivalent，oneconsistingof
unproductiveservices。Thesethreeclasses，therefore，are
consideredinpoliticaleconomyasmakingupthewholecommunity。
2。Butalthoughthesethreesometimesexistasseparate
classes，dividingtheproduceamongthem，theydonotnecessarily
oralwayssoexist。Thefactissomuchotherwise，thatthereare
onlyoneortwocommunitiesinwhichthecompleteseparationof
theseclassesisthegeneralrule。EnglandandScotland，with
partsofBelgiumandHolland，arealmosttheonlycountriesin
theworld，wheretheland，capital，andlabouremployedin
agriculture，aregenerallythepropertyofseparateowners。The
ordinarycaseis，thatthesamepersonownseithertwoofthese
requisites，orallthree。
Thecaseinwhichthesamepersonownsallthree，embraces
thetwoextremesofexistingsociety，inrespecttothe
independenceanddignityofthelabouringclass。First，whenthe
labourerhimselfistheproprietor。Thisisthecommonestcasein
theNorthernStatesoftheAmericanUnion;oneofthecommonest
inFrance，Switzerland，thethreeScandinaviankingdoms，and
partsofGermany;（1*）andacommoncaseinpartsofItalyandin
Belgium。Inallthesecountriesthereare，nodoubt，largelanded
properties，andastillgreaternumberwhich，withoutbeing
large，requiretheoccasionalorconstantaidofhiredlabourers。
Much，however，ofthelandisownedinportionstoosmallto
requireanyotherlabourthanthatofthepeasantandhisfamily，
orfullytooccupyeventhat。Thecapitalemployedisnotalways
thatofthepeasantproprietor，manyofthesesmallproperties
beingmortgagedtoobtainthemeansofcultivating;butthe
capitalisinvestedatthepeasant’srisk，andthoughhepays
interestforit，itgivestonooneanyrightofinterference，
except，perhaps，eventuallytotakepossessionoftheland，if
theinterestceasestobepaid。
Theothercaseinwhichtheland，labour，andcapital，belong
tothesameperson，isthecaseofslavecountries，inwhichthe
labourersthemselvesareownedbythelandowner。OurWestIndia
coloniesbeforeemancipation，andthesugarcoloniesofthe
nationsbywhomasimilaractofjusticeisstillunperformed，
areexamplesoflargeestablishmentsforagriculturaland
manufacturinglabour（theproductionofsugarandrumisa
combinationofboth）inwhichtheland，thefactories（ifthey
maybesocalled），themachinery，andthedegradedlabourers，are
allthepropertyofacapitalist。Inthiscase，aswellasinits
extremeopposite，thecaseofthepeasantproprietor，thereisno
divisionoftheproduce。
3。Whenthethreerequisitesarenotallownedbythesame
person，itoftenhappensthattwoofthemareso。Sometimesthe
samepersonownsthecapitalandtheland，butnotthelabour。
Thelandlordmakeshisengagementdirectlywiththelabourer，and
suppliesthewholeorpartofthestocknecessaryfor
cultivation。Thissystemistheusualoneinthosepartsof
ContinentalEurope，inwhichthelabourersareneitherserfson
theonehand，norproprietorsontheother。Itwasverycommonin
FrancebeforetheRevolution，andisstillpractisedinsome
partsofthatcountry，whenthelandisnotthepropertyofthe
cultivator。Itprevailsgenerallyintheleveldistrictsof
Italy，exceptthoseprincipallypastoral，suchastheMaremmaof
TuscanyandtheCampagnaofRome。Onthissystemthedivisionof
theproduceisbetweentwoclasses，thelandownerandthe
labourer。
Inothercasesagainthelabourerdoesnotowntheland，but
ownsthelittlestockemployedonit，thelandlordnotbeingin
thehabitofsupplyingany。Thissystemgenerallyprevailsin
Ireland。ItisnearlyuniversalinIndia，andinmostcountries
oftheEast;whetherthegovernmentretains，asitgenerally
does，theownershipofthesoil，orallowsportionstobecome，
eitherabsolutelyorinaqualifiedsense，thepropertyof
individuals。InIndia，however，thingsaresofarbetterthanin
Ireland，thattheowneroflandisinthehabitofmaking
advancestothecultivators，iftheycannotcultivatewithout
them。Fortheseadvancesthenativelandedproprietorusually
demandshighinterest;buttheprincipallandowner，the
government，makesthemgratuitously，recoveringtheadvanceafter
theharvest，togetherwiththerent。Theproduceisheredivided
asbefore，betweenthesametwoclasses，thelandownerandthe
labourer。
Thesearetheprincipalvariationsintheclassificationof
thoseamongwhomtheproduceofagriculturallabouris
distributed。Inthecaseofmanufacturingindustrytherenever
aremorethantwoclasses，thelabourersandthecapitalists。The
originalartisansinallcountrieswereeitherslaves，orthe
womenofthefamily。Inthemanufacturingestablishmentsofthe
ancients，whetheronalargeoronasmallscale，thelabourers
wereusuallythepropertyofthecapitalist。Ingeneral，ifany
manuallabourwasthoughtcompatiblewiththedignityofa
freeman，itwasonlyagriculturallabour。Theconversesystem，in
whichthecapitalwasownedbythelabourer，wascoevalwithfree
labour，andunderitthefirstgreatadvancesofmanufacturing
industrywereachieved。Theartisanownedtheloomorthefew
toolsheused，andworkedonhisownaccount;oratleastended
bydoingso，thoughheusuallyworkedforanother，firstas
apprenticeandnextasjourneyman，foracertainnumberofyears
beforehecouldbeadmittedamaster。Butthestatusofa
permanentjourneyman，allhislifeahiredlabourerandnothing
more，hadnoplaceinthecraftsandguildsofthemiddleages。
Incountryvillages，whereacarpenterorablacksmithcannot
liveandsupporthiredlabourersonthereturnsofhisbusiness，
heisevennowhisownworkman;andshopkeepersinsimilar
circumstancesaretheirownshopmen，orshopwomen。Butwherever
theextentofthemarketadmitsofit，thedistinctionisnow
fullyestablishedbetweentheclassofcapitalists，oremployers
oflabour，andtheclassoflabourers;thecapitalists，in
general，contributingnootherlabourthanthatofdirectionand
superintendence。
NOTES:
1。\"TheNorwegianreturn\"（saytheCommissionersofPoorLaw
Enquiry，towhominformationwasfurnishedfromnearlyevery
countryinEuropeandAmericabytheambassadorsandconsuls
there）\"statesthatatthelastcensusin1825，outofa
populationof1，051，318persons，therewere59，464freeholders。
Asby59，464freeholdersmustbemeant59，464headsoffamilies，
orabout300，000individuals;thefreeholdersmustformmorethan
afourthofthewholepopulation。MrMacgregorstatesthatin
Denmark（bywhichZealandandtheadjoiningislandsareprobably
meant）outofapopulationof926，110，thenumberoflanded
proprietorsandfarmersis415，110，ornearlyone—half。In
Sleswick—Holstein，outofapopulationof604，085，itis196，017，
oraboutone—third。Theproportionofproprietorsandfarmersto
thewholepopulationisnotgiveninSweden;buttheStockholm
returnestimatestheaveragequantityoflandannexedtoa
labourer’shabitationatfromonetofiveacres;andthroughthe
Gottenburgreturngivesalowerestimate，itadds，thatthe
peasantspossessmuchoftheland。InWurtemburgwearetoldthat
morethantwo—thirdsofthelabouringpopulationarethe
proprietorsoftheirownhabitations，andthatalmostallownat
leastagardenoffromthree—quartersofanacretoanacreanda
half。\"Insomeofthesestatements，proprietorsandfarmersare
notdiscriminated;but\"allthereturnsconcurinstatingthe
numberofday—labourerstobeverysmall。\"——（PrefacetoForeign
Communications，p。xxxviii）Asthegeneralstatusofthe
labouringpeople，theconditionofaworkmanforhireisalmost
peculiartoGreatBritain。
ThePrinciplesofPoliticalEconomy
byJohnStuartMill
Book2，Chapter4
OfCompetition，andCustom
1。Undertheruleofindividualproperty，thedivisionofthe
produceistheresultoftwodeterminingagencies:Competition，
andCustom。Itisimportanttoascertaintheamountofinfluence
whichbelongstoeachofthesecauses，andinwhatmannerthe
operationofoneismodifiedbytheother。
Politicaleconomistsgenerally，andEnglishpolitical
economistsaboveothers，havebeenaccustomedtolayalmost
exclusivestressuponthefirstoftheseagencies;toexaggerate
theeffectofcompetition，andtotakeintolittleaccountthe
otherandconflictingprinciple。Theyareapttoexpress
themselvesasiftheythoughtthatcompetitionactuallydoes，in
allcases，whateveritcanbeshowntohethetendencyof
competitiontodo。Thisispartlyintelligible，ifweconsider
thatonlythroughtheprincipleofcompetitionhaspolitical
economyanypretensiontothecharacterofascience。Sofaras
rents，profits，wages，prices，aredeterminedbycompetition，
lawsmaybeassignedforthem。Assumecompetitiontobetheir
exclusiveregulator，andprinciplesofbroadgeneralityand
scientificprecisionmaybelaiddown，accordingtowhichthey
willberegulated。Thepoliticaleconomistjustlydeemsthishis
properbusiness:andasanabstractorhypotheticalscience，
politicaleconomycannotberequiredtodo，andindeedcannotdo，
anythingmore。Butitwouldbeagreatmisconceptionofthe
actualcourseofhumanaffairs，tosupposethatcompetition
exercisesinfactthisunlimitedsway。Iamnotspeakingof
monopolies，eithernaturalorartificial，orofanyinterferences
ofauthoritywiththelibertyofproductionorexchange。Such
disturbingcauseshavealwaysbeenallowedforbypolitical
economists。Ispeakofcasesinwhichthereisnothingto
restraincompetition;nohindrancetoiteitherinthenatureof
thecaseorinartificialobstacles;yetinwhichtheresultis
notdeterminedbycompetition，butbycustomorusage;
competitioneithernottakingplaceatall，orproducingits
effectinquiteadifferentmannerfromthatwhichisordinarily
assumedtobenaturaltoit。
2。Competition，infact，hasonlybecomeinanyconsiderable
degreethegoverningprincipleofcontracts，atacomparatively
modernperiod。Thefartherwelookbackintohistory，themorewe
seealltransactionsandengagementsundertheinfluenceoffixed
customs。Thereasonisevident。Customisthemostpowerful
protectoroftheweakthestrong;theirsoleprotectorwhere
therearenolawsorgovernmentadequatetothepurpose。Custom
isabarrierwhich，eveninthemostoppressedconditionof
mankind，tyrannyisforcedinsomedegreetorespect。Tothe
industriouspopulation，inaturbulentmilitarycommunity，
freedomofcompetitionisavainphrase;theyareneverina
conditiontomaketermsforthemselvesbyit:thereisalwaysa
masterwhothrowshisswordintothescale，andthetermsare
suchasheimposes。Butthoughthelawofthestrongestdecides，
itisnottheinterestnoringeneralthepracticeofthe
strongesttostrainthatlawtotheutmost，andeveryrelaxation
ofithasatendencytobecomeacustom，andeverycustomto
becomearight。Rightsthusoriginating，andnotcompetitionin
anyshape，determine，inarudestateofsociety，theshareof
theproduceenjoyedbythosewhoproduceit。Therelations，more
especially，betweenthelandownerandthecultivator，andthe
paymentsmadebythelattertotheformer，are，inallstatesof
societybutthemostmodern，determinedbytheusageofthe
country。Neveruntillatetimeshavearighttoretainhis
holdings，whilehefulfilsthecustomaryrequirements;andthus
become，inacertainsense，aco—proprietorofthesoil。Even
wheretheholderhasnotacquiredthisfixityoftenure，the
termsofoccupationhaveoftenbeenfixedandinvariable。
InIndia，forexample，andotherAsiaticcommunities
similarlyconstituted，theryots，orpeasant—farmers，arenot
regardedastenantsatwill，norevenastenantsbyvirtueofa
lease。Inmostvillagesthereareindeedsomeryotsonthis
precariousfooting，consistingofthose，orthedescendantsof
those，whohavesettledintheplaceataknownandcomparatively
recentperiod;butallwhoarelookeduponasdescendantsor
representativesoftheoriginalinhabitants，andevenmanymere
tenantsofancientdate，arethoughtentitledtoretaintheir
land，aslongastheypaythecustomaryrents。Whatthese
customaryrentsare，oroughttobe，hasindeed，inmostcases，
becomeamatterofobscurity;usurpation，tyranny，andforeign
conquesthavingtoagreatdegreeobliteratedtheevidencesof
them。ButwhenanoldandpurelyHindooprincipalityfallsunder
thedominionoftheBritishGovernment，orthemanagementofits
officers，andwhenthedetailsoftherevenuesystemcometobe
inquiredinto，itisusuallyfoundthatthoughthedemandsofthe
greatlandholder，theState，havebeenswelledbyfiscalrapacity
untilalllimitispracticallylostsightof，ithasyetbeen
thoughtnecessarytohaveadistinctnameandaseparatepretext
foreachincreaseofexaction;sothatthedemandhassometimes
cometoconsistofthirtyorfortydifferentitems，inaddition
tothenominalrent。Thiscircuitousmodeofincreasingthe
paymentsassuredlywouldnothavebeenresortedto，iftherehad
beenanacknowledgedrightinthelandlordtoincreasetherent。
Itsadoptionisaproofthattherewasonceaneffective
limitation，arealcustomaryrent;andthattheunderstoodright
oftheryottotheland，solongashepaidrentaccordingto
custom，wasatsometimeorothermorethannominal。（1*）The
BritishGovernmentofIndiaalwayssimplifiesthetenureby
consolidatingthevariousassessmentsintoone，thusmakingthe
rentnominallyaswellasreallyanarbitrarything，oratleast
amatterofspecificagreement:butitscrupulouslyrespectsthe
rightoftheryottotheland，thoughuntilthereformsofthe
presentgeneration（reformsevennowonlypartiallycarriedinto
effect）itseldomlefthimmuchmorethanabaresubsistence。
InmodernEuropethecultivatorshavegraduallyemergedfrom
astateofpersonalslavery。Thebarbarianconquerorsofthe
WesternEmpirefoundthattheeasiestmodeofmanagingtheir
conquestswouldbetoleavetheoccupationofthelandinthe
handsinwhichtheyfoundit，andtosavethemselvesalabourso
uncongenialasthesuperintendenceoftroopsofslaves，by
allowingtheslavestoretaininacertaindegreethecontrolof
theirownactions，underanobligationtofurnishthelordwith
provisionsandlabour。Acommonexpedientwastoassigntothe
serf，forhisexclusiveuse，asmuchlandaswasthought
sufficientforhissupport，andtomakehimworkontheother
landsofhislordwheneverrequired。Bydegreestheseindefinite
obligationsweretransformedintoadefiniteone，ofsupplyinga
fixedquantityofprovisionsorafixedquantityoflabour:and
asthelords，intime，becameinclinedtoemploytheirincomein
thepurchaseofluxuriesratherthaninthemaintenanceof
retainers，thepaymentsinkindwerecommutedforpaymentsin
money。Eachconcession，atfirstvoluntaryandrevocableat
pleasure，graduallyacquiredtheforceofcustom，andwasatlast
recognisedandenforcedbythetribunals。Inthismannerthe
serfsprogressivelyroseintoafreetenantry，whoheldtheir
landinperpetuityonfixedconditions。Theconditionswere
sometimesveryonerous，andthepeopleverymiserable。Buttheir
obligationsweredeterminedbytheusageorlawofthecountry，
andnotbycompetition。
Wherethecultivatorshadneverbeen，strictlyspeaking，in
personalbondage，oraftertheyhadceasedtobeso，the
exigenciesofapoorandlittleadvancedsocietygaveriseto
anotherarrangement，whichinsomepartsofEurope，evenhighly
improvedparts，hasbeenfoundsufficientlyadvantageoustobe
continuedtothepresentday。Ispeakofthem閠ayersystem。
Underthis，thelandisdivided，insmallfarms，amongsingle
families，thelandlordgenerallysupplyingthestockwhichthe
agriculturalsystemofthecountryisconsideredtorequire，and
receiving，inlieuofrentandprofit，afixedproportionofthe
produce。Thisproportion，whichisgenerallypaidinkind，is
usually，（asisimpliedinthewordsm閠ayer，mezzaiuolo，and
medietarius，）one—half。Thereareplaces，however，suchasthe
richvolcanicsoiloftheprovinceofNaples，wherethelandlord
takestwo—thirds，andyetthecultivatorbymeansofanexcellent
agriculturecontrivestolive。Butwhethertheproportionis
two—thirdsorone—half，itisafixedproportion;notvariable
fromfarmtofarm，orfromtenanttotenant。Thecustomofthe
countryistheuniversalrule;nobodythinksofraisingor
loweringrents，oroflettinglandonotherthanthecustomary
conditions。Competition，asaregulatorofrent，hasno
existence。
3。Prices，whenevertherewasnomonopoly，cameearlierunder
theinfluenceofcompetition，andaremuchmoreuniversally
subjecttoit，thanrents:butthatinfluenceisbynomeans，
eveninthepresentactivityofmercantilecompetition，so
absoluteasissometimesassumed。Thereisnopropositionwhich
meetsusinthefieldofpoliticaleconomyoftenerthanthis—that
therecannotbetwopricesinthesamemarket。Suchundoubtedly
isthenaturaleffectofunimpededcompetition;yeteveryone
knowsthatthereare，almostalways，twopricesinthesame
market。Notonlyarethereineverylargetown，andinalmost
everytrade，cheapshopsanddearshops，butthesameshopoften
sellsthesamearticleatdifferentpricestodifferent
customers:and，asageneralrule，eachretaileradaptshisscale
ofpricestotheclassofcustomerswhomheexpects。The
wholesaletrade，inthegreatarticlesofcommerce，isreally
underthedominionofcompetition。There，thebuyersaswellas
sellersaretradersormanufacturers，andtheirpurchasesarenot
influencedbyindolenceorvulgarfinery，nordependonthe
smallermotivesofpersonalconvenience，butarebusiness
transactions。Inthewholesalemarketsthereforeitistrueasa
generalproposition，thattherearenottwopricesatonetime
forthesamething:thereisateachtimeandplaceamarket
price，whichcanbequotedinaprice—current。Butretailprice，
thepricepaidbytheactualconsumer，seemstofeelveryslowly
andimperfectlytheeffectofcompetition;andwhencompetition
doesexist，itoften，insteadofloweringprices，merelydivides
thegainsofthehighpriceamongagreaternumberofdealers。
Henceitisthat，ofthepricepaidbytheconsumer，solargea
proportionisabsorbedbythegainsofretailers;andanyonewho
inquiresintotheamountwhichreachesthehandsofthosewho
madethethingshebuys，willoftenbeastonishedatits
smallness。Whenindeedthemarket，beingthatofagreatcity，
holdsoutasufficientinducementtolargecapitaliststoengage
inretailoperations，itisgenerallyfoundabetterspeculation
toattractalargebusinessbyundersellingothers，thanmerely
todividethefieldofemploymentwiththem。Thisinfluenceof
competitionismakingitselffeltmoreandmorethroughthe
principalbranchesofretailtradeinthelargetowns;andthe
rapidityandcheapnessoftransport，bymakingconsumersless
dependentonthedealersintheirimmediateneighbourhood，are
tendingtoassimilatemoreandmorethewholecountrytoalarge
town:buthithertoitisonlyinthegreatcentresofbusiness
thatretailtransactionshavebeenchiefly，orevenmuch，
determined，bycompetition。Elsewhereitratheracts，whenit
actsatall，asanoccasionaldisturbinginfluence;thehabitual
regulatoriscustom，modifiedfromtimetotimebynotions
existinginthemindsofpurchasersandsellers，ofsomekindof
equityorjustice。
Inmanytradesthetermsonwhichbusinessisdonearea
matterofpositivearrangementamongthetrade，whousethemeans
theyalwayspossessofmakingthesituationofanymemberofthe
bodywhodepartsfromitsfixedcustoms，inconvenientor
disagreeable。Itiswellknownthatthebooksellingtradewas，
untillately，oneofthese，andthatnotwithstandingtheactive
spiritofrivalryinthetrade，competitiondidnotproduceits
naturaleffectinbreakingdownthetraderules。Allprofessional
remunerationisregulatedbycustom。Thefeesofphysicians，
surgeons，andbarristers，thechargesofattorneys，arenearly
invariable。Notcertainlyforwantofabundantcompetitionin
thoseprofessions，butbecausethecompetitionoperatesby
diminishingeachcompetitor’schanceoffees，notbyloweringthe
feesthemselves。
Sincecustomstandsitsgroundagainstcompetitiontoso
considerableanextent，evenwhere，fromthemultitudeof
competitorsandthegeneralenergyinthepursuitofgain，the
spiritofcompetitionisstrongest，wemaybesurethatthisis
muchmorethecasewherepeoplearecontentwithsmallergains，
andestimatetheirpecuniaryinterestatalowerratewhen
balancedagainsttheireaseortheirpleasure。Ibelieveitwill
oftenbefound，inContinentalEurope，thatpricesandcharges，
ofsomeorofallsorts，aremuchhigherinsomeplacesthanin
othersnotfardistant，withoutitsbeingpossibletoassignany
othercausethanthatithasalwaysbeenso:thecustomersare
usedtoit，andacquiesceinit。Anenterprisingcompetitor，with
sufficientcapital，mightforcedownthecharges，andmakehis
fortuneduringtheprocess;buttherearenoenterprising
competitors;thosewhohavecapitalprefertoleaveitwhereit
is，ortomakelessprofitbyitinamorequietway。
Theseobservationsmustbereceivedasageneralcorrection
tobeappliedwheneverrelevant，whetherexpresslymentionedor
not，totheconclusionscontainedinthesubsequentportionsof
thistreatise。Ourreasoningsmust，ingeneral，proceedasifthe
knownandnaturaleffectsofcompetitionwereactuallyproduced
byit，inallcasesinwhichitisnotrestrainedbysome
positiveobstacle。Wherecompetition，thoughfreetoexist，does
notexist，orwhereitexists，buthasitsnaturalconsequences
overruledbyanyotheragency，theconclusionswillfailmoreor
lessofbeingapplicable。Toescapeerror，weought，inapplying
theconclusionsofpoliticaleconomytotheactualaffairsof
life，toconsidernotonlywhatwillhappensupposingthemaximum
ofcompetition，buthowfartheresultwillbeaffectedif
competitionfallsshortofthemaximum。
Thestatesofeconomicalrelationwhichstandfirstinorder
tobediscussedandappreciated，arethoseinwhichcompetition
hasnopart，thearbiteroftransactionsbeingeitherbruteforce
orestablishedusage。Thesewillbethesubjectofthenextfour
chapters。
NOTES:
1。TheancientlawbooksoftheHindoosmentioninsomecases
one—sixth，inothersone—fourthoftheproduce，asaproperrent;
butthereisnoevidencethattheruleslaiddowninthosebooks
were，atanyperiodofhistory，reallyactedupon。
ThePrinciplesofPoliticalEconomy
byJohnStuartMill
Book2，Chapter5
OfSlavery
1。Amongtheformswhichsocietyassumesundertheinfluence
oftheinstitutionofproperty，thereare，asIhavealready
remarked，two，otherwiseofawidelydissimilarcharacter，but
resemblinginthis，thattheownershipoftheland，thelabour，
andthecapital，isinthesamehands。Oneofthesecasesisthat
ofslavery，theotheristhatofpeasantproprietors。Intheone，
thelandownerownsthelabour，intheotherthelabourerownsthe
land。Webeginwiththefirst。
Inthissystemalltheproducebelongstothelandlord。The
foodandothernecessariesofhislabourersarepartofhis
expenses。Thelabourerspossessnothingbutwhathethinksfitto
givethem，anduntilhethinksfittotakeitback:andtheywork
ashardashechooses，orisable，tocompelthem。Their
wretchednessisonlylimitedbyhishumanity，orhispecuniary
interest。Withthefirstconsideration，wehaveonthepresent
occasionnothingtodo。Whatthesecondinsodetestablea
constitutionofsocietymaydictate，dependsonthefacilities
forimportingfreshslaves。Iffull—grownable—bodiedslavescan
beprocurredinsufficientnumbers，andimportedatamoderate
expense，self—interestwillrecommendworkingtheslavesto
death，andreplacingthemimportationinpreferencetotheslow
andexpensiveprocessofbreedingthem。Noraretheslave—owners
generallybackwardinlearningthislesson。Itisnotoriousthat
suchwasthepracticeinourslavecolonies，whiletheslave
tradewaslegal;anditissaidtobesostillinamongtheCuba
When，asamongtheancients，theslave—marketcouldonlybe
suppliedbycaptiveseithertakeninwar，orkidnappedfrom
thinlyscatteredtribesontheremoteconfinesoftheknown
world，itwasgenerallymoreprofitabletokeepupthenumberby
breeding，whichnecessitatesafarbettertreatmentofthem;and
forthisreason，joinedwithseveralothers，theconditionof
slaves，notwithstandingoccasionalenormities，wasprobablymuch
lessbadintheancientworld，thaninthecoloniesofmodern
nations。TheHelotsareusuallycitedasthetypeofthemost
hideousformofpersonalslavery，butwithhowlittletruth
appearsfromthefactthattheywereregularlyarmed（thoughnot
withthepanoplyofthehoplite）andformedanintegralpartof
themilitarystrengthoftheState。Theyweredoubtlessan
inferioranddegradedcaste，buttheirslaveryseemstohavebeen
oneoftheleastonerousvarietiesofserfdom。Slaveryappearsin
farmorefrightfulcoloursamongtheRomans，duringtheperiodin
whichtheRomanaristocracywasgorgingitselfwiththeplunder
ofanewly—conqueredworld。TheRomanswereacruelpeople，and
theworthlessnoblessportedwiththelivesoftheirmyriadsof
slaveswiththesamerecklessprodigalitywithwhichthey
squanderedanyotherpartoftheirill—acquiredpossessions。Yet，
slaveryisdivestedofoneofitsworstfeatureswhenitis
compatiblewithhope;enfranchisementwaseasyandcommon:
enfranchisedslavesobtainedatoncethefullrightsofcitizens，
andinstanceswerefrequentoftheiracquiringnotonlyriches，
butlatterlyevenhonours。Bytheprogressofmilderlegislation
undertheEmperors，muchoftheprotectionoflawwasthrown
roundtheslave，hebecamecapableofpossessingproperty，and
theevilaltogetherassumedaconsiderablygentleraspect。Until，
however，slaveryassumesthemitigatedformofvillenage，in
whichnotonlytheslaveshavepropertyandlegalrights，but
theirobligationsaremoreorlesslimitedbyusage，andthey
partlylabourfortheirownbenefit;theirconditionisseldom
suchastoproducearapidgrowthneitherofpopulationorof
production。
2。Solongasslavecountriesareunderpeopledinproportion
totheircultivableland，thelabouroftheslaves，underany
tolerablemanagement，producesmuchmorethanissufficientfor
theirsupport;especiallyasthegreatamountofsuperintendence
whichtheirlabourrequires，preventingthedispersionofthe
population，insuressomeoftheadvantagesofcombinedlabour。
Hence，inagoodsoilandclimate，andwithreasonablecareof
hisowninterests，theownerofmanyslaveshasthemeansof
beingrich。Theinfluence，however，ofsuchastateofsocietyon
production，isperfectlywellunderstood。Itistruismtoassert
thatlabourextortedbyfearofpunishmentisinefficientand
unproductive。Itistruethatinsomecircumstances，humanbeings
canbedrivenbythelashtoattempt，andeventoaccomplish，
thingswhichtheywouldnothaveundertakenforanypaymentwhich
itcouldhavebeenworthwhiletoanemployertoofferthem。And
itislikelythatproductiveoperationswhichrequiremuch
combinationoflabour，theproductionofsugarforexample，would
nothavetakenplacesosoonintheAmericancolonies，ifslavery
hadnotexistedtokeepmassesoflabourtogether。Therearealso
savagetribessoaversefromregularindustry，thatindustrial
lifeisscarcelyabletointroduceitselfamongthemuntilthey
areeitherconqueredandmadeslavesof，orbecomeconquerorsand
makeothersso。Butafterallowingthefullvalueofthese
considerations，itremainscertainthatslaveryisincompatible
withanyhighstateoftheartsoflife，andanygreatefficiency
oflabour。Forallproductswhichrequiremuchskill，slave
countriesareusuallydependentonforeigners。Hopelessslavery
effectuallybrutifiestheintellect;andintelligenceinthe
slaves，thoughoftenencouragedintheancientworldandinthe
East，isinamoreadvancedstateofsocietyasourceofsomuch
dangerandanobjectofsomuchdreadtothemasters，thatin
someoftheStatesofAmericaitwasahighlypenaloffenceto
teachaslavetoread。Allprocessescarriedonbyslavelabour
areconductedintherudeststrengthoftheslaveis，onan
average，nothalfexerted。andmostunimprovedmanner。Andeven
theanimalstrengthoftheslaveis，onanaverage，nothalf
exerted。Theunproductivenessandwastefulnessoftheindustrial
systemintheSlaveStatesisinstructivelydisplayedinthe
valuablewritingsofMr。Olmsted。Themildestformofslaveryis
certainlytheconditionoftheserf，whoisattachedtothesoil，
supportshimselffromhisallotment，andworksacertainnumber
ofdaysintheweekforhislord。Yetthereisbutoneopinionon
theextremeinefficiencyofserflabour。Thefollowingpassageis
fromProfessorJones，（1*）whoseEssayontheDistributionof
Wealth（orratheronRent），isacopiousrepertoryofvaluable
factsonthelandedtenuresofdifferentcountries。
\"TheRussians，orratherthoseGermanwriterswhohave
observedthemannersandhabitsofRussia，statesomestrong
factsonthispoint。TwoMiddlesexmowers，theysay，willmowin
adayasmuchgrassassixRussianserfs，andinspiteofthe
dearnessofprovisionsinEnglandandtheircheapnessinRussia，
themowingaquantityofhaywhichwouldcostanEnglishfarmer
halfacopeck，willcostaRussianproprietorthreeorfour
copecks。*ThePrussiancounsellorofstate，Jacob，isconsidered
tohaveproved，thatinRussia，whereeverythingischeap，the
labourofaserfisdoublyasexpensiveasthatofalabourerin
England。M。Schmalzgivesastartlingaccountofthe
unproductivenessofserflabourinPrussia，fromhisown
knowledgeandobservation。*InAustria，itisdistinctlystated，
thatthelabourofaserfisequaltoonlyone—thirdofthatofa
freehiredlabourer。Thiscalculation，madeinanableworkon
agriculture（withsomeextractsfromwhichIhavebeenfavoured），
isappliedtothepracticalpurposeofdecidingonthenumberof
labourersnecessitytocultivateanestateofagivenmagnitude。
Sopalpable，indeed，aretheilleffectsoflabourrentsonthe
industryoftheagriculturalpopulation，thatinAustriaitself，
whereproposalsofchangesofanykinddonotreadilymaketheir
way，schemesandplansforthecommutationoflabourrentsareas
popularasinthemorestirringGermanprovincesoftheNorth。\"*
Whatiswantinginthequalityofthelabouritself，isnot
madeupbyanyexcellenceinthedirectionandsuperintendence。
Asthesamewriterremarks，thelandedproprietors\"are
necessarily，intheircharacterofcultivatorsoftheirown
domains，theonlyguidesanddirectorsoftheindustryofthe
agriculturalpopulation，\"sincetherecanbenointermediate
classofcapitalistfarmerswherethelabourersaretheproperty
ofthelord。Greatlandownersareeverywhereanidleclass，orif
theylabouratall，addictthemselvesonlytothemoreexciting
kindsofexertion;thatlion’ssharewhichsuperiorsalways
reserveforthemselves。\"Itwould，\"asMr。Jonesobserves，\"be
hopelessandirrationaltoexpect，thataraceofnoble
proprietors，fencedroundwithprivilegesanddignity，and
attractedtomilitaryandpoliticalpursuitsbytheadvantages
andhabitsoftheirstation，shouldeverbecomeattentive
cultivatorsasabody。\"EveninEngland，ifthecultivationof
everyestatedependeduponitsproprietor，anyonecanjudgewhat
wouldbetheresult。Therewouldbeafewcasesofgreatscience
andenergy，andnumerousindividualinstancesofmoderate
success，butthegeneralstateofagriculturewouldbe
contemptible。
3。Whethertheproprietorsthemselveswouldlosebythe
emancipationoftheirslaves，isadifferentquestionfromthe
comparativeeffectivenessoffreeandslavelabourtothe
community。Therehasbeenmuchdiscussionofthisquestionasan
abstractthesis;asifitcouldpossiblyadmitofanyuniversal
solution。Whetherslaveryorfreelabourismostprofitableto
theemployer，dependsonthewagesofthefreelabourer。These，
again，dependonthenumbersofthelabouringpopulation，
comparedwiththecapitalandtheland。Hiredlabourisgenerally
somuchmoreefficientthanslavelabour，thattheemployercan
payaconsiderablygreatervalueinwages，thanthemaintenance
ofhisslavescosthimbefore，andyetbeagainerbythechange:
buthecannotdothiswithoutofserfdominEurope，andits
destructionintheWesternnations，weredoubtlesshastenedby
thechangewhichthegrowthofpopulationmusthavemadeinthe
pecuniaryinterestsofthemaster。Aspopulationpressedharder
upontheland，withanyimprovementsinagriculture，the
maintenanceoftheserfsnecessarilybecamemorecostly，and
theirlabourlessvaluable。Withtherateofwagessuchasitis
inIreland，orinEngland（where，inproportiontoits
efficiency，labourisquiteascheapasinIreland），noonecan
foramomentimaginethatslaverycouldbeprofitable。Ifthe
Irishpeasantrywereslaves，theirmasterswouldbeaswilling，
astheirlandlordsnoware，topaylargesumsmerelytogetrid
ofthem。IntherichandunderpeopledsoiloftheWestIndia
islands，thereisjustaslittledoubtthatthebalanceof
profitsbetweenfreeandslavelabourwasgreatlyonthesideof
slavery，andthatthecompensationcantedtotheslave—ownersfor
itsabolitionwasnotmore，perhapsevenless，thananequivalent
fortheirloss。
Moreneedsnotbesaidhereonacausesocompletelyjudged
anddecidedasthatofslavery。Itsdemeritsarenolongera
questionrequiringargument;thoughthetemperofmindmanifested
bythelargerpartoftheinfluentialclassesinGreatBritain
respectingthestruggleinAmerica，showshowgrievouslythe
feelingsofthepresentgenerationofEnglishmen，onthis
subject，hadfallenbehindthepositiveactsofthegeneration
whichprecededthem。ThatthesonsofthedeliverersoftheWest
IndianNegroesshouldexpectwithcomplacency，andencourageby
theirsympathies，theestablishmentofagreatandpowerful
militarycommonwealth，pledgedbyitsprinciplesanddrivenby
itsstrongestintereststobethearmedpropagatorofslavery
througheveryregionoftheearthintowhichitspowercould
penetrate，disclosesamentalstateintheleadingportionofour
higherandmiddleclasseswhichitismelancholytosee，andwill
bealastingblotinEnglishhistory。Fortunatelytheystopped
shortofactuallyaiding，otherwisethanbywords，thenefarious
enterprisetowhichtheywerenotashamedofwishingsuccess;and
attheexpenseofthebestbloodoftheFreeStates，buttotheir
immeasurableelevationinmentalandmoralworth，thecurseof
slaveryhasbeencastoutfromthegreatAmericanrepublic，to
finditslasttemporaryrefugeinBrazilandCuba。NoEuropean
country，exceptSpainalone，anylongerparticipatesinthe
enormity。Evenserfagehasnowceasedtohavealegalexistence
inEurope。DenmarkhasthehonourofbeingthefirstContinental
nationwhichimitatedEnglandinliberatingitscolonialslaves;
andtheabolitionofslaverywasoneoftheearliestactsofthe
heroicandcalumniatedProvisionalGovernmentofFrance。The
DutchGovernmentwasnotlongbehind，anditscoloniesand
dependenciesarenow，Ibelievewithoutexception，freefrom
actualslavery，thoughforcedlabourforthepublicauthorities
isstillarecognisedinstitutioninJava，soon，wemayhope，to
heexchangedforcompletepersonalfreedom。
NOTES:
1。EssayontheDistributionofWealthandontheSourcesof
Taxation。BytheRev。RichardJones，page50。
ThePrinciplesofPoliticalEconomybyJohnStuartMillBook2，Chapter6
OfPeasantProprietors1。Intheregimeofpeasantproperties，asinthatofslavery，thewholeproducebelongstoasingleowner’andthedistinctionofrent，profits，andwages，doesnotexist。Inallotherrespects，thetwostatesofsocietyaretheextremeoppositesofeachother。Theoneisthestateofgreatestoppressionanddegradationtothelabouringclass。Theotheristhatinwhichtheyarethemostuncontrolledarbitersoftheirownlot。
Theadvantage，however，ofsmallpropertiesinland，isoneofthemostdisputedquestionsintherangeofpoliticaleconomy。
OntheContinent，thoughtherearesomedissentientsfromtheprevailingopinion，thebenefitofhavinganumerousproprietarypopulationexistsinthemindsofmostpeopleintheformofanaxiom。ButEnglishauthoritiesareeitherunawareofthejudgmentofContinentalagriculturists，orarecontenttoputitaside，onthepleaoftheirhavingnoexperienceoflargepropertiesinfavourablecircumstances:theadvantageoflargepropertiesbeingonlyfeltwheretherearealsolargefarms;andasthis，inarabledistricts，impliesagreateraccumulationofcapitalthanusuallyexistsontheContinent，thegreatContinentalestates，exceptinthecaseofgrazingfarms，aremostlyletoutforcultivationinsmallportions。Thereissometruthinthis;buttheargumentadmitsofbeingretorted;foriftheContinentknowslittle，byexperience，ofcultivationonalargescaleandbylargecapital，thegeneralityofEnglishwritersarenobetteracquaintedpracticallywithpeasantproprietors，andhavealmostalwaysthemosterroneousideasoftheirsocialconditionandmodeoflife。YettheoldtraditionsevenofEnglandareonthesamesidewiththegeneralopinionoftheContinent。The\"yeomanry\"whowerevauntedasthegloryofEnglandwhiletheyexisted，andhavebeensomuchmournedoversincetheydisappeared，wereeithersmallproprietorsorsmallfarmers，andiftheyweremostlythelast，thecharactertheyboreforsturdyindependenceisthemorenoticeable。ThereisapartofEngland，unfortunatelyaverysmallpart，wherepeasantproprietorsarestillcommon;forsucharethe\"statesmen\"ofCumberlandandWestmoreland，thoughtheypay，Ibelieve，generallyifnotuniversally，certaincustomarydues，which，beingfixed，nomoreaffecttheircharacterofproprietor，thantheland—taxdoes。