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