TheremarksofSismondionthemoralinfluencesofthisstate
ofsocietyarenotlessworthyofattention。Therightsand
obligationsofthemetayerbeingfixedbyusage，andalltaxes
andratesheingpaidbytheproprietor，"lem閠ayerales
avantagesdelapropri閠？sansl’inconv閚ientdelad閒endre。
C’estaupropri閠airequ’aveclaterreappartientlaguerre:pour
luiilvitenpaixavectoussesvoisins;iln’a？leur間ard
aucunmotifderivalit？ouded閒iance;ilconservelabonne
harmonieaveceux，commeavecsonmaitre，aveclefiscetavec
l’間lise:ilvendpeu，ilach鑤epeu，iltouchepeud’argent，
maispersonneneluiendemande。Onasouventparl？ducaract鑢e
douxetbienveillantdesToscans，maisonn’apointassez
remarqu？lacausequialepluscontribu？？pr閟ervercette
douceur;c’estcellequiasoustraittouslesagriculteurs，
formantplusdestroisquartsdelapopulation，？presquetoute
occasiondequerelle。"Thefixityoftenurewhichthemetayer，so
longashefulfilshisknownobligations，possessesbyusage，
thoughnotbylaw，giveshimthelocalattachments，andalmost
thestrongsenseofpersonalinterest，characteristicofa
proprietor。"Lem閠ayervitsursam閠airiecommesurson
h閞itage，l’aimantd’affection，travaillant？labonifiersans
cesse，seconfiantdansl’avenir，etcomptantbienqueseschamps
seronttravaill閟apr鑣luiparsesenfansetlesenfansdeses
enfans。Eneffet，leplusgrandnomhredesm閠ayersviventde
g閚閞ationeng閚閞ationsurlam阭eterre;ilslaconnaissenten
d閠ailavecunepr閏isionquelesentimentseuldelapropri閠？
peutdonner……Leschamps閘ev閟enterrasseslesunsau—dessus
desautresn’ontsouventpasplusdequatrepiedsdelargeur，
maisiln’yenapasundontlem閠ayern’ait閠udi？enquelque
sortelecaract鑢e。Celui—ciestsec，celui—l？froidethumide;
icilaterreestprofonde，l？cen’estqu’unecro鹴equicouvre？
peineleroc;lefromentprosp鑢emieuxsurl’un，leseiglesur
i’autre;iciceseraitpeineperduedesemerdubl？deTurquie，
ailleurslaterreserefuseauxf鑦esetauxlupins，plusloinle
linviendra？merveille，etleborddeceruisseauserapropreau
chanvre:ainsil’onapprenddum閠ayer，avec閠onnement，quedans
uneespacededixarpens，lesol，lesaspects，etl’inclinaison
duterrain，pr閟ententplusdevari閠？qu’unrichefermiern’en
saiteng閚閞aldistinguerdansunefermedecinqcentsacres
d’閠endue。C’estquelederniersentqu’iln’estl？quede
passage，quedeplusildoitseconduirepardesr鑗les
g閚閞ales，etnegligerlesd閠ails。Maislem閠ayer，avec
l’exp閞iencedupass？asentisonintelligence関eill閑par
l’int閞阾etl’affectionpourdevenirlemeilleurdes
observateurs，etavectoutl’avenirdevantlui，ilnesongepas？
luiseulement，mais？sesenfanset？sespetitsenfans。Aussi
lorsqu’ilplantel’olivier，arbres閏ulaire，etqu’ilm閚ageau
fondducreuxqu’ilfaitpourluiun閏oulementauxeauxqui
pourraientluinuire，il閠udietouteslescouchesdeterrain
qu’ilestappel？？d閒oncer。"（25*）
4。Idonotofferthesequotationsasevidenceofthe
intrinsicexcellenceofthemetayersystem;buttheysurely
sufficetoprovethatneither"landmiserablycultivated"nora
peoplein"themostabjectpoverty"haveanynecessaryconnexion
withit，andthattheunmeasuredvituperationlavisheduponthe
systembyEnglishwriters，isgroundedonanextremelynarrow
viewofthesubject。Ilookupontheruraleconomyofitalyas
simplysomuchadditionalevidenceinfavourofsmalloccupations
withpermanenttenure。itisanexampleofwhatcanhe
accomplishedbythosetwoelements，evenunderthedisadvantage
ofthepeculiarnatureofthemetayercontract，inwhichthe
motivestoexertiononthepartofthetenantareonlyhalfas
strongasifhefarmedthelandonthesamefootingofperpetuity
atamoney—rent，eitherfixed，orvaryingaccordingtosomerule
whichwouldleavetothetenantthewholebenefitofhisown
exertions。Themetayertenureisnotonewhichweshouldhe
anxioustointroducewheretheexigenciesofsocietyhadnot
naturallygivenbirthtoit;butneitheroughtwetobeeagerto
abolishitonamere？prioriviewofitsdisadvantages。Ifthe
systeminTuscanyworksaswellinpracticeasitisrepresented
todo，witheveryappearanceofminuteknowledge，bysocompetent
anauthorityasSismondi;ifthemodeoflivingofthepeople，
andthesizeoffarms，haveforagesmaintainedandstill
maintainthemselves（26*）suchastheyaresaidtobebyhim，it
weretoberecettedthatastateofruralwell—beingsomuch
beyondwhatisrealizedinmostEuropeancountries，shouldbeput
tohazardbyanattempttointroduce，undertheguiseof
agriculturalimprovement，asystemofmoney—rentsandcapitalist
farmers。Evenwherethemetayersarepoor，andthesubdivision
great，itisnottobeassumedasofcourse，thatthechange
wouldbeforthebetter。Theenlargementoffarms，andthe
introductionofwhatarecalledimprovements，usuallydiminish
thenumberoflabourersemployedontheland;andunlessthe
growthofcapitalintradeandmanufacturesaffordsanopening
forthedisplacedpopulation，orunlesstherearereclaimable
wastesonwhichtheycanbelocated，competitionwillsoreduce
wages，thattheywillprobablybeworseoffasday—labourersthan
theywereasmetayers。
Mr。JonesveryproperlyobjectsagainsttheFrenchEconomists
ofthelastcentury，thatinpursuingtheirfavouriteobjectof
introducingmoneyrents，theyturnedtheirmindssolelytoputting
farmersintheplaceofmetayers，insteadoftransformingthe
existingmetayersintofarmers;which，ashejustlyrenmarks，can
scarcelybeeffected，unless，toenablethemetayerstosaveand
becomeownersofstock，theproprietorssubmitforaconsiderable
timetoadiminutionofincome，insteadofexpectinganincrease
ofit，whichhasgenerallybeentheirimmediatemotiveformaking
theattempt。ifthistransformationwereeffected，andnoother
changemadeinthemetayer’scondition;if，preservingallthe
otherrightswhichusageinsurestohim，hemerelygotridofthe
landlord’sclaimtohalftheproduce，payinginlieuofita
moderatefixedrent;hewouldbesofarinabetterpositionthan
atpresent，asthewhole，insteadofonlyhalfthefruitsofany
improvementhemade，wouldnowbelongtohimself;butevenso，
thebenefitwouldnotbewithoutalloy。forametayer，thoughnot
himselfacapitalist，hasacapitalistforhispartner，andhas
theuse，inItalyatleast，ofaconsiderablecapital，asis
provedbytheexcellenceofthefarmbuildings:anditisnot
probablethatthelandownerswouldanylongerconsenttoperil
theirmoveablepropertyonthehazardsofaagrcultural
enterprise，whenassuredofafixedmoneyincomewithoutit。Thus
wouldthequestionstand，evenifthechangeleftundisturbedthe
metayer’svirtualfixityoftenure，andconvertedhim，infact，
intoapeasantproprietorataquitrent。Butifwesupposehim
convertedintoameretenant，displaceableatthelandlord’s
will，andliabletohavehisrentraisedbycompetitiontoany
amountwhichanyunfortunatebeinginsearchofsubsistencecan
befoundtoofferorpromiseforit;hewouldloseallthe
featuresinhisconditionwhichpreserveitfrombeing
deteriorated;hewouldbecastdownfromhispresentpositionof
akindofhalfproprietoroftheland，andwouldsinkintoa
cottiertenant。
NOTES:
1。InFrancebeforetheRevolution，accordingtoArthurYoung（i。
403）therewasgreatlocaldiversityinthisrespect。In
Champagne"thelandlordcommonlyfindshalfthecattleandhalf
theseed，andthemetayer，labour，implements，andtaxes;butin
somedistrictsthelandlordbearsashareofthese。In
Roussillon，thelandlordpayshalfthetaxes;andinGuienne，
fromAuchtoFleuran，manylandlordspayall。NearAguillon，on
theGaronne，themetayersfurnishhalfthecattle。AtNangis，in
theIsleofFrance，Imetwithanagreementforthelandlordto
furnishlivestock，implements，harness，andtaxes;themetayer
foundlabourandhisowncapitationtax:thelandlordrepaired
thehouseandgates;themetayerthewindows:thelandlord
providedseedthefirstyear，themetayerthelast;inthe
interveningyearstheysupplyhalfandhalf。IntheBourbonnois
thelandlordfindsallsortsoflivestock，yetthemetayer
sells，changes，andbuysathiswill;thestewardkeepingan
accountofthesemutations，forthelandlordhashalftheproduct
ofsales，andpayshalfthepurchases。"InPiedmont，hesays，
"thelandlordcommonlypaysthetaxesandrepairsthebuildings，
andthetenantprovidescattle，implements，andseed。"（II。151）
2。Etydessurl’EconomiePolitiqtue，6meessai:DelaCondition
desCultivateursenToscane。
3。LettersfromItaly。IquotefromDr。Rigby’stranslation（p。
22）。
4。Thisvirtualfixityoftenureisnothoweveruniversalevenin
Italy;anditisabsencethatSismondiattributestheinferior
conditionofthemetayersintoitssomeprovincesofNaples，in
Lucca，andintheRivieraofGenoa;wherethelandlordsobtaina
larger（thoughstillafixed）shareoftheproduce。Inthose
countriesthecultivationissplendid，butthepeoplewretchedly
poor。"Thesamemisfortunewouldprobablyhavebefallenthe
peopleofTuscanyifpublicopiniondidnotprotectthe
cultivator;butaproprietorwouldnotdaretoimpose
condiditionsunusualinthecountry，andeveninchangingone
metayerforanotherhealtersnothinginthetermsofthe
engagement。"NouveauxPrincipes，liv。iii。ch。5。
5。M。BastiataffirmsthateveninFrance，incontestablythe
leastfavourableexampleofthemetayersystem，itseffectin
repressingpopulationisconspicuous。
Unfaitbienconstate，c’estquelatendanceaune
multiplicationdesordonneesemanifesteprincipalementauseinde
cetteclassed’hommesquivitdesalaires。Cetteprevoyancequi
retardelesmariagesasurellepeud’empire，parcequelesmaux
quiresultentdel’excesdeconcurrenceneluiapparaissentque
tres—confusement，etdansunlointainenapparencepeu
redoutable。C’estdonclacirconstancelaplusfavorablepourun
paysd’etreorganisedemaniereaexclurelesalariat。Dansles
paysdemetairies，lesmariagessontdeterminesprincipalement
parlesbesoinsdelaculture;ilssemultiplientquand，par
quelquecirconstance，lesmetairiesoffrentdesvidesnuisibles
auxtravaux;ilsseralentissentquandlesplacessontremplies。
Ici，unetatdechosesfacileaconstater，savoir，lerapport
entrel’etenduedudomaineetlenombredesbras，operecommela
prevoyanceetplussurementqu’elle。Aussivoyons—nousquesi
aucunecirconstancen’intervientpourouvrirdesdebouchesaune
populationsurnumeraire，elledemeurestationnaire。Nos
departementsmeridionauxensontlapreuve。"——Considerations
surleMetayage，JournaldesEconomistesforFebruary1846。
6。WealthofNations，bookiii。ch。2。
7。Travels，vol。i。pp。404—5。
8。Ibid。ii。151—3。
9。Ibid。217。
10。PrinciplesofPoliticalEconomy，3rded。p。471。
11。EssayontheDistributionofWealth，pp。102—4。
12。M。deTracyispartiallyanexception，inasmuchashis
experiencereacheslowerdowvnthantherevolutionaryperiod;but
headmits（asMr。Joneshashimselfstatedinanotherplace）that
heisacquaintedonlywithalimiteddistrict，ofgreat
subdivisionandunfertilesoil。
M。Passyisofopinion，thataFrenchpeasantrymustbein
indigenceandthecountrybadlycultivatedonametayersystem，
becausetheproportionoftheproduceclaimablebythelandlord
istoohigh;itbeingonlyinmorefavourableclimatesthatany
land，notofthemostexuberantfertility，canpayhalfitsgross
produceinrent，andleaveenoughtopeasantfarmerstoenable
themtogrowsuccessfullythemoreexpensiveandvaluable
productsofagriculture。（SystemesdeCulture，p。35）Thisisan
objectiononlytoaparticularnumericalproportion，whichis
indeedthecommonone，butisnotessentialtothesystem。
13。Seethe"MemoiresurlaSurchargedesImpositions
qu’eprouvaitlaGeneralitedeLimoges，adresseauConseild’Etat
en1766，"pp。260—304ofthefourthvolumeofTurgot’sWorks。The
occasionalengagementsoflandlords（asmentionedbyArthur
Young）topayapartofthetaxes，wereaccordingtoTurgot，of
recentorigin，underthecompulsionofactualnecessity。"Le
proprietairenes’ypretequ’autantqu’ilnepeuttrouverde
metayerautrement;ainsi，memedanscecas—la，lemetayerest
toujoursreduitacequ’ilfautprecisementpournepasmourirde
faim。"（p。275）
14。Vol。i。p。404。
15。lettersfromItaly，translatedbyRigby，p。16
16。Ibid。pp。19，20。
17。Ibid。pp。24—31。
18。Pp。78—9。
19。Pp。73—6。
20。Travels，volii。p。156。
21。LettersfromItaly，p。75。
22。Ibid，pp。295—6。
23。FromhisSixthEssay，formerlyreferedto。
24。"InventairedutrousseaudeJeanne，filledeValenePapini，a
sonmariageavecGiovacchinoLandi，le29Avril1835，aPorta
Vecchia，prePescia:
"28chemises，3robesdebourredesoieencouleur，4robes
defleuretdesoieencouleur，7robesd’indienneoutoilede
coton，2robesdetravaild’hiver（mezzalana），3robesetjupons
detravaild’ete（mola），3jupesblanches，5tabliersdetoile
peinte，1tablierdesoienoir，1tablierdemerinosnoir，9
tabliersdetravail（mola）encouleur，4mouchoirsblancs，8
mouchoirsencouleur，3mouchoirsdesoie，2voilesbrodeset1
voiledetulle，3essuie—mains，14pairesdebas，2chapeaux，
l’undefeutre，l’autredepaillefine:2cameesd’or，2boucles
d’oreillesenor，1chapeletavecdeuxpiastresromaines，1
collierdecorailavecsacroixd’or……Touteslesepousesplus
richesontdepluslavestediseta，lagranderobedetoilette，
desoie，qu’ellesneportentquequatreoucinqfoisdansleur
vie。
"Leshommesn’ontpointdetrousseaux;l’epouxensemariant
n’avaitque14chemises，etlaresteenproportion。Iln’a
encoureapresentque13pairesdedraps，tandisquedansla
familledesafemmeilyena30paires。"
25。Oftheintelligenceofthisinterestingpeople，M。de
Sismondispeaksinthemostfavourableterms。Fewofthemcan
read;butthereisoftenonememberofthefamilydestinedfor
thepriesthood，whoreadstothemonwinterevening。Their
languagedifferslittlefromthepurestItalian。Thetastefor
improvisaioninverseisgeneral。"LespaysansduvaldeNievole
frequentantlespectaclelesjoursdefete，enete，deneufa
onzeheuresdusoir:leuradmissionneleurcouteguerequecinq
solsdeFrance。Alfieriestleurauteurdeprediliction;toute
l’histoiredesAtridesestfamiliereaceshommesquenesavent
paslire，etquivontdemanderacepoeteaustereundelassement
deleursrudestraveaux。"Unlikemostrustics，theyfindpleasure
inthebeautyofthecountry。"Danslescollinesduvalde
Nievoleontrouvedevantchaquemaison，l’airepourbattrele
ble，quiararementplusdevingt—cinqatrentetoisescarrees，
c’estleplussouventleseulespacedeniveauqu’onrecontre
danstoutelemetarie。Enmemetempsc’estuneterrassequi
dominelesplainesetalvallee，etd’oulavues’etendsurun
paysravissant。Presquejamaisjenem’ysuisarretepour
l’admirer，sansquelemetayersoitvenujouirdemonadmiration，
etm’indiquerdudoigtlesbeautesqu’ilcroyaitpouvoirm’avoir
echappe。"
26。"Onnevoitjamais，"saysSismondi，"unefamilledemetayers
proposerasonmaitredepartagersametairie，amoinsquele
travailnesoitreellementsuperieurasesforces，etqu’ellene
sentelacertitudedeconserverlesmemesjouissancessurun
moindreespacedeterrain。Onnevoitjamaisdansunefamille
plusieursfilssemarierenmemetemps，etformerautantde
menagesnouveaux;unseulprendunefemmeetsechargedessoins
dumenage;aucundesesfreresnesemarie，amoinsquelui—meme
n’aitpasd’enfans，ouquel’onn’offreacetautrefrereune
nouvellemetaire。"——NouveauxPrincipes，liv，iii。chap。5。
ThePrinciplesofPoliticalEconomy
byJohnStuartMill
Book2，Chapter9
OfCottiers
1。BythegeneralappellationofcottiertenureIshall
designateallcaseswithoutexceptioninwhichthelabourermakes
hiscontractforlandwithouttheinterventionofacapitalist
farmer，andinwhichtheconditionsofthecontract，especially
theamountofrent，aredeterminednotbycustombutby
competition。TheprincipalEuropeanexampleofthistenureis
Ireland，anditisfromthatcountrythatthetermcottieris
derived。*Byfarthegreaterpartoftheagriculturalpopulation
ofIrelandmightuntilverylatelyhavebeensaidtobe
cottier—tenants;exceptsofarastheUlstertenant—right
constitutedanexception。Therewas，indeed，anumerousclassof
labourerswho（wemaypresumethroughtherefusaleitherof
proprietorsoroftenantsinpossessiontopermitanyfurther
subdivision）hadbeenunabletoobtaineventhesmallestpatchof
landaspermanenttenants。But，fromthedeficiencyofcapital，
thecustomofpayingwagesinlandwassouniversal，thateven
thosewhoworkedascasuallabourersforthecottiersorforsuch
largerfarmersaswerefoundinthecountry，wereusuallypaid
notinmoney，butbypermissiontocultivatefortheseasona
pieceofground，whichwasgenerallydeliveredtothembythe
farmerreadymanured，andwasknownbythenameofconacre。For
thistheyagreedtopayamoneyrent，oftenofseveralpoundsan
acre，butnomoneyactuallypassed，thedebtbeingworkedoutin
labour，atamoneyvaluation。
Theproduce，onthecottiersystem，beingdividedintotwo
portions，rent，andtheremunerationofthelabourer;theoneis
evidentlydeterminedbytheother。Thelabourerhaswhateverthe
landlorddoesnottake:theconditionofthelabourerdependson
theamountofrent。Butrent，beingregulatedbycompetition，
dependsupontherelationbetweenthedemandforland，andthe
supplyofit。Thedemandforlanddependsonthenumberof
competitors，andthecompetitorsarethewholeruralpopulation。
Theeffect，therefore，ofthistenure，istobringtheprinciple
ofpopulationtoactdirectlyontheland，andnot，asin
England，oncapital。Rent，inthisstateofthings，dependson
theproportionbetweenpopulationandland。Asthelandisa
fixedquantity，whilepopulationhasanunlimitedpowerof
increase;unlesssomethingchecksthatincrease，thecompetition
forlandsoonforcesuprenttothehighestpointconsistentwith
keepingthepopulationalive。Theeffects，therefore，ofcottier
tenuredependontheextenttowhichthecapacityofpopulation
toincreaseiscontrolled，eitherbycustom，byindividual
prudence，orbystarvationanddisease。
Itwouldbeanexaggerationtoaffirm，thatcottiertenancy
isabsolutelyincompatiblewithaprosperousconditionofthe
labouringclass。Ifwecouldsupposeittoexistamongapeople
towhomahighstandardofcomfortwashabitual;whose
requirementsweresuch，thattheywouldnotofferahigherrent
forlandthanwouldleavethemanamplesubsistence，andwhose
moderateincreaseofnumbersleftnounemployedpopulationto
forceuprentsbycompetition，savewhentheincreasingproduce
ofthelandfromincreaseofskillwouldenableahigherrentto
bepaidwithoutinconvenience;thecultivatingclassmightbeas
wellremunerated，mighthaveaslargeashareofthenecessaries
andcomfortsoflife，onthissystemoftenureasonanyother。
Theywouldnot，however，whiletheirrentswerearbitrary，enjoy
anyofthepeculiaradvantageswhichmetayersontheTuscan
systemderivefromtheirconnexionwiththeland。Theywould
neitherhavetheuseofacapitalbelongingtotheirlandlords，
norwouldthewantofthisbemadeupbytheintensemotivesto
bodilyandmentalexertionwhichactuponthepeasantwhohasa
permanenttenure。Onthecontrary，anyincreasedvaluegivento
thelandbytheexertionsofthetenant，wouldhavenoeffectbut
toraisetherentagainsthimself，eitherthenextyear，orat
farthestwhenhisleaseexpired。Thelandlordsmighthavejustice
orgoodsenseenoughnottoavailoftheadvantagewhich
competitionwouldgivethem;anddifferentlandlordswoulddoso
indifferentdegrees。Butitisneversafetoexpectthataclass
orbodyofmenwillactinoppositiontotheirimmediate
pecuniaryinterest;andevenadoubtonthesubjectwouldbe
almostasfatalasacertainty，forwhenapersonisconsidering
whetherornottoundergoapresentexertionorsacrificefora
comparativelyremotefuture，thescaleisturnedbyaverysmall
probabilitythatthefruitsoftheexertionorofthesacrifice
willhetakenawayfromhim。Theonlysafeguardagainstthese
uncertaintieswouldbethegrowthofacustom，insuringa
permanenceoftenureinthesameoccupant，withoutliabilityto
anyotherincreaseofrentthanmighthappentobesanctionedby
thegeneralsentimentsofthecommunity。TheUlstertenant—right
issuchacustom。Theveryconsiderablesumswhichoutgoing
tenantsobtainfromtheirsuccessors，forthegoodwilloftheir
farms，（1*）inthefirstplaceactuallylimitthecompetitionfor
landtopersonswhohavesuchsumstooffer:whilethesamefact
alsoprovesthatfulladvantageisnottakenbythelandlordof
eventhatmorelimitedcompetition，sincethelandlord’srent
doesnotamounttothewholeofwhattheincomingtenantnotonly
offersbutactuallypays。Hedoessointhefullconfidencethat
therentwillnotberaised;andforthishehastheguaranteeof
acustom，notrecognisedbylaw，butderivingitsbindingforce
fromanothersanction，perfectlywellunderstoodinIreland。（2*）
Withoutoneorotherofthesesupports，acustomlimitingthe
rentoflandisnotlikelytogrowupinanyprogressive
community。Ifwealthandpopulationwerestationary，rentalso
wouldgenerallybestationary，andafterremainingalongtime
unaltered，wouldprobablycometobeconsideredunalterable。But
allprogressinwealthandpopulationtendstoariseofrents。
Underametayersystemthereisanestablishedmodeinwhichthe
owneroflandissureofparticipatingintheincreasedproduce
drawnfromit。Butonthecottiersystemhecanonlydosobya
readjustmentofthecontract，whilethatreadjustment，ina
progressivecommunity，wouldalmostalwaysbetohisadvantage。
Hisinterest，therefore，isdecidedlyopposedtothegrowthof
anycustomcommutingrentintoafixeddemand。
2。Wheretheamountofrentisnotlimited，eitherbylawor
custom，acottiersystemhasthedisadvantagesoftheworst
metayersystem，withscarcelyanyoftheadvantagesbywhich，in
thebestformsofthattenure，theyarecompensated。Itis
scarcelypossiblethatcottieragricultureshouldbeotherthan
miserable。Thereisnotthesamenecessitythattheconditionof
thecultivatorsshouldbeso。Sincebyasufficientrestrainton
populationcompetitionforlandcouldbekeptdown，andextreme
povertyprevented;habitsofprudenceandahighstandardof
comfort，onceestablished，wouldhaveafairchanceof
maintainingthemselves:thougheveninthesefavourable
circumstancesthemotivestoprudencewouldbeconsiderably
weakerthaninthecaseofmetayers，protectedbycustom（like
thoseofTuscany）frombeingdeprivedoftheirfarms:sincea
metayerfamily，thusprotected，couldnotbeimpoverishedbyany
otherimprovidentmultiplicationthantheirown，butacottier
family，howeverprudentandself—restraining，mayhavetherent
raisedagainstitbytheconsequencesofthemultiplicationof
otherfamilies。Anyprotectiontothecottiersagainstthisevil
couldonlybederivedfromasalutarysentimentofdutyor
dignity，pervadingtheclass。thissource，however，theymight
deriveconsiderableprotection。Ifthehabitualstandardof
requirementamongtheclasswerehigh，ayoungmanmightnot
choosetoofferarentwhichwouldleavehiminaworsecondition
thantheprecedingtenant;oritmightbethegeneralcustom，as
itactuallyisinsomecountries，nottomarryuntilafarmis
vacant。
Butitisnotwhereahighstandardofcomforthasrooted
itselfinthehabitsofthelabouringclass，thatweareever
calledupontoconsidertheeffectsofacottiersystem。That
systemisfoundonlywherethehabitualrequirementsoftherural
labourersarethelowestpossible;whereaslongastheyarenot
actuallystaring，theywillmultiply:andpopulationisonly
checkedbythediseases，andtheshortnessoflife，consequenton
insufficiencyofmerelyphysicalnecessaries。Thiswasthestate
ofthelargestportionoftheIrishpeasantry。Whenapeoplehave
sunkintothisstate，andstillmorewhentheyhavebeeninit
fromtimeimmemorial，thecottiersystemisanalmostinsuperable
obstacletotheiremergingfromit。Whenthehabitsofthepeople
aresuchthattheirincreaseisnevercheckedhutbythe
impossibilityofobtainingabaresupport，andwhenthissupport
canonlybeobtainedfromland，allstipulationsandagreements
respectingamountofrentaremerelynominal;thecompetitionfor
landmakesthetenantsundertaketopaymorethanitispossible
theyshouldpay，andwhentheyhavepaidalltheycan，more
almostalwaysremainsdue。
"AsitmayfairlybesaidoftheIrishpeasantry，"saidMr。
Revans，theSecretarytotheIrishPoorLawEnquiry
Commission，（3*）"thateveryfamilywhichhasnotsufficientland
toyielditsfoodhasoneormoreofitsmemberssupportedby
begging，itwilleasilybeconceivedthateveryendeavourismade
bythepeasantrytoobtainsmallholdings，andthattheyarenot
influencedintheirbiddingsbythefertilityoftheland，orby
theirabilitytopaytherent，butsolelybytheofferwhichis
mostlikelytogainthempossession。Therentswhichthey
promise，theyarealmostinvariablyincapableofpaying;and
consequentlytheybecomeindebtedtothoseunderwhomtheyhold，
almostassoonastheytakepossession。Theygiveup，inthe
shapeofrent，thewholeproduceofthelandwiththeexception
ofasufficiencyofpotatoesforasubsistence;butasthisis
rarelyequaltothepromisedrent，theyconstantlyhaveagainst
themanincreasingbalance。Insomecases，thelargestquantity
ofproducewhichtheirholdingseveryielded，orwhich，under
theirsystemoftillage，theycouldinthemostfavourable
seasonsbemadetoyield，wouldnotbeequaltotherentbid;
consequently，ifthepeasantfulfilledhisengagementwithhis
landlord，whichheisrarelyabletoaccomplish，hewouldtill
thegroundfornothing，andgivehislandlordapremiumforbeing
allowedtotillit。Ontheseacoast，fishermen，andinthe
northerncountiesthosewhohavelooms，frequentlypaymorein
rentthanthemarketvalueofthewholeproduceofthelandthey
hold。Itmightbesupposedthattheywouldbebetterwithoutland
undersuchcircumstances。Butfishingmightfailduringaweekor
two，andsomightthedemandfortheproduceoftheloom，when，
didtheynotpossessthelanduponwhichtheirfoodisgrown，
theymightstarve。Thefullamountoftherentbid，however，is
rarelypaid。Thepeasantremainsconstantlyindebttohis
landlord;hismiserablepossessions—thewretchedclothingof
himselfandofhisfamily，thetwoorthreestools，andthefew
piecesofcrockery，whichhiswretchedhovelcontains，wouldnot，
ifsold，liquidatethestandingandgenerallyaccumulatingdebt。
Thepeasantryaremostlyayearinarrear，andtheirexcusefor
notpayingmoreisdestitution。Shouldtheproduceofthe
holding，inanyyear，bemorethanusuallyabundant，orshould
thepeasantbyanyaccidentbecomepossessedofanyproperty，his
comfortscannotbeincreased;hecannotindulgeinbetterfood，
norinagreaterquantityofit。Hisfurniturecannotbe
increased，neithercanhiswifeorchildrenbebetterclothed。
Theacquisitionmustgotothepersonunderwhomheholds。The
accidentaladditionwillenablehimtoreducehisarrearofrent，
andthustodeferejectment。Butthismustbetheboundofhis
expectation。"
Asanextremeinstanceoftheintensityofcompetitionfor
land，andofthemonstrousheighttowhichitoccasionallyforced
upthenominalrent;wemaycitefromtheevidencetakenbyLord
Devon’sCommission，（4*）afactattestedbyMrHurly，Clerkof
theCrownforKerry。"IhaveknownatenantbidforafarmthatI
wasperfectlywellacquaintedwith，worth50l。ayear:Isawthe
competitiongetuptosuchanextent，thathewasdeclaredthe
tenantat450l。"
3。Insuchacondition，whatcanatenantgainbyanyamount
ofindustryorprudence，andwhatlosebyanyrecklessness？If
thelandlordatanytimeexertedhisfulllegalrights，the
cottierwouldnotbeableeventolive。Ifbyextraexertionhe
doubledtheproduceofhisbitofland，orifheprudently
abstainedfromproducingmouthstoeatitup，hisonlygainwould
betohavemorelefttopaytohislandlord;while，ifhehad
twentychildren，theywouldstillbefedfirst，andthelandlord
couldonlytakewhatwasleft。Almostaloneamongstmankindthe
cottierisinthiscondition，thathecanscarcelybeeither
betterorworseoffbyanyactofhisown。Ifhewereindustrious
orprudent，nobodybuthislandlordwouldgain;ifheislazyor
intemperate，itisathislandlord’sexpense。Asituationmore
devoidofmotivestoeitherlabourorself—command，imagination
itselfcannotconceive。Theinducementsoffreehumanbeingsare
takenaway，andthoseofaslavenotsubstituted。Hehasnothing
tohope，andnothingtofear，exceptbeingdispossessedofhis
holding，andagainstthisheprotectshimselfbytheultimaratio
ofadefensivecivilwar。RockismandWhiteboyismwerethe
determinationofapeoplewhohadnothingthatcouldbecalled
theirsbutadailymealofthelowestdescriptionoffood，notto
submittobeingdeprivedofthatforotherpeople’sconvenience。
Isitnot，then，abittersatireonthemodeinwhich
opinionsareformedonthemostimportantproblemsofhuman
natureandlife，tofindpublicinstructorsofthegreatest
pretension，imputingthebackwardnessofIrishindustry，andthe
wantofenergyoftheIrishpeopleinimprovingtheircondition，
toapeculiarindolenceandinsoucianceintheCelticrace？Of
allvulgarmodesofescapingfromtheconsiderationoftheeffect
ofsocialandmoralinfluencesonthehumanmind，themostvulgar
isthatofattributingthediversitiesofconductandcharacter
toinherentnaturaldifferences。Whatracewouldnotbeindolent
andinsouciantwhenthingsaresoarranged，thattheyderiveno
advantagefromforethoughtorexertion？Ifsucharethe
arrangementsinthemidstofwhichtheyliveandwork，what
wonderifthelistlessnessandindifferencesoengenderedarenot
shakenoffthefirstmomentanopportunityofferswhenexertion
wouldreallybeofuse？Itisverynaturalthatapleasure—loving
andsensitivelyorganizedpeopleliketheIrish，shouldbeless
addictedtosteadyroutinelabourthantheEnglish，becauselife
hasmoreexcitementsforthemindependentofit;buttheyarenot
lessfittedforitthantheirCelticbrethrentheFrench，nor
lesssothantheTuscans，ortheancientGreeks。Anexcitable
organizationispreciselythatinwhich，byadequateinducements，
itiseasiesttokindleaspiritofanimatedexertion。Itspeaks
nothingagainstthecapacitiesofindustryinhumanbeings，that
theywillnotexertthemselveswithoutmotive。Nolabourerswork
harder，inEnglandorAmerica，thantheIrish;butnotundera
cottiersystem。
4。ThemultitudeswhotillthesoilofIndia，areina
conditionsufficientlyanalogoustothecottiersystem，andat
thesametimesufficientlydifferentfromit，torenderthe
comparisonofthetwoasourceofsomeinstruction。Inmostparts
ofIndiathereare，andperhapshavealwaysbeen，onlytwo
contractingparties，thelandlordandthepeasant:thelandlord
beinggenerallythesovereign，exceptwherehehas，byaspecial
instrument，concededhisrightstoanindividual，whobecomeshis
representative。Thepayments，however，ofthepeasants，orryots
astheyaretermed，haveseldomifeverbeenregulated，asin
Ireland，bycompetition。Thoughthecustomslocallyobtaining
wereinfinitelyvarious，andthoughpracticallynocustomcould
bemaintainedagainstthesovereign’swill，therewasalwaysa
ruleofsomesortcommontoaneighbourhood;thecollectordid
notmakehisseparatebargainwiththepeasant，butassessedeach
accordingtotheruleadoptedfortherest。Theideawasthus
keptupofarightofpropertyinthetenant，oratallevents，
ofarighttopermanentpossession;andtheanomalyaroseofa
fixityoftenureinthepeasant—farmer，co—existingwithan
arbitrarypowerofincreasingtherent。
WhentheMogulgovernmentsubstituteditselfthroughoutthe
greaterpartofIndiafortheHindoorulers，itproceededona
differentprinciple。Aminutesurveywasmadeoftheland，and
uponthatsurveyanassessmentwasfounded，fixingthespecific
paymentduetothegovernmentfromeachfield。ifthisassessment
hadneverbeenexceeded，theryotswouldhavebeeninthe
comparativelyadvantageouspositionofpeasant—proprietors，
subjecttoaheavy，butafixedquit—rent。Theabsence，however，
ofanyrealprotectionagainstillegalextortions，renderedthis
improvementintheirconditionrathernominalthanreal;and，
exceptduringtheoccasionalaccidentofahumaneandvigorous
localadministrator，theexactionshadnopracticallimitbutthe
inabilityoftheryottopaymore。
ItwastothisstateofthingsthattheEnglishrulersof
Indiasucceeded;andtheywere，atanearlyperiod，struckwith
theimportanceofputtinganendtothisarbitrarycharacterof
theland—revenue，andimposingafixedlimittothegovernment
demand。TheydidnotattempttogobacktotheMogulvaluation。
ithasbeeningeneraltheveryrationalpracticeoftheEnglish
GovernmentinIndia，topaylittleregardtowhatwaslaiddown
asthetheoryofthenativeinstitutions，buttoinquireintothe
rightswhichexistedandwererespectedinpractice，andto
protectandenlargethose。Foralongtime，however，itblundered
grievouslyaboutmattersoffact，andgrosslymisunderstoodthe
usagesandrightswhichitfoundexisting。Itsmistakesarose
fromtheinabilityofordinarymindstoimagineastateofsocial
relationsfundamentallydifferentfromthosewithwhichtheyare
practicallyfamiliar。Englandbeingaccustomedtogreatestates
andgreatlandlords，theEnglishrulerstookitforgrantedthat
indiamustpossessthelike;andlookingroundforsomesetof
peoplewhomightbetakenfortheobjectsoftheirsearch，they
pitcheduponasortoftax—gathererscalledzemindars。"The
zemindar，"saysthephilosophicalhistorianofIndia，（5*）"had
someoftheattributeswhichbelongtoalandowner;hecollected
therentsofaparticulardistrict，hegovernedthecultivators
ofthatdistrict，livedincomparativesplendour，andhisson
succeededhimwhenhedied。Thezemindars，therefore，itwas
inferredwithoutdelay，weretheproprietorsofthesoil，the
landednobilityandgentryofIndia。Itwasnotconsideredthat
thezemindars，thoughtheycollectedtherents，didnotkeep
them;butpaidthemallawaywithasmalldeductiontothe
government。Itwasnotconsideredthatiftheygovernedthe
ryots，andinmanyrespectsexercisedoverthemdespoticpower，
theydidnotgovernthemastenantsoftheirs，holdingtheir
landseitheratwillorbycontractunderthem。Thepossessionof
theryotwasanhereditarypossession;fromwhichitwasunlawful
forthezemindartodisplacehim;foreveryfarthingwhichthe
zemindardrewfromtheryot，hewasboundtoaccount;anditwas
onlybyfraud，if，outofallthathecollected，heretainedan
anamorethanthesmallproportionwhich，aspayforcollection，
hewaspermittedtoreceive。"
"TherewasanopportunityinIndia，"continuesthehistorian，
"towhichthehistoryoftheworldpresentsnotaparallel。Next
afterthesovereign，theimmediatecultivatorshad，byfar，the
greatestportionofinterestinthesoil。Fortherights（suchas
theywere）ofthezemindars，acompletecompensationmighthave
easilybeenmade。Thegenerousresolutionwasadopted，of
sacrificingtotheimprovementofthecountry，theproprietary
rightsofthesovereign。Themotivestoimprovementwhich
propertygives，andofwhichthepowerwassojustlyappreciated，
mighthavebeenbestoweduponthoseuponwhomtheywouldhave
operatedwithaforceincomparablygreaterthanthatwithwhich
theycouldoperateuponanyotherclassofmen:theymighthave
beenbestoweduponthosefromwhomalone，ineverycountry，the
principalimprovementsinagriculturemustbederived，the
immediatecultivatorsofthesoil。Andameasureworthytobe
rankedamongthenoblestthateverweretakenfortheimprovement
ofanycountry，mighthavehelpedtocompensatethepeopleof
Indiaforthemiseriesofthatmisgovernmentwhichtheyhadso
longendured。ButthelegislatorswereEnglisharistocrats;and
aristocraticalprejudicesprevailed。"
Themeasureprovedatotalfailure，astothemaineffects
whichitswellmeaningpromotersexpectedfromit。Unaccustomedto
estimatethemodeinwhichtheoperationofanygiveninstitution
ismodifiedevenbysuchvarietyofcircumstancesasexists
withinasinglekingdom，theybatteredthemselvesthattheyhad
created，throughouttheBengalprovinces，Englishlandlords，and
itprovedthattheyhadonlycreatedirishones。Thenewlanded
aristocracydisappointedeveryexpectationbuiltuponthem。They
didnothingfortheimprovementoftheirestates，buteverything
fortheirownruin。Thesamepainsnotbeingtaken，ashadbeen
takeninIreland，toenablelandlordstodefytheconsequencesof
theirimprovidence，nearlythewholelandofBengalhadtobe
sequestratedandsold，fordebtsorarrearsofrevenue，andin
onegenerationmostoftheancientzemindarshadceasedtoexist。
Otherfamilies，mostlythedescendantsofCalcuttamoneydealers，
orofnativeofficialswhohadenrichedthemselvesunderthe
Britishgovernment，nowoccupytheirplace;andliveasuseless
dronesonthesoilwhichhasbeengivenuptothem。Whateverthe
governmenthassacrificedofitspecuniaryclaims，forthe
creationofsuchaclass，hasatthebestbeenwasted。
InthepartsofIndiaintowhichtheBritishrulehasbeen
morerecentlyintroduced，theblunderhasbeenavoidedof
endowingauselessbodyofgreatlandlordswithgiftsfromthe
publicrevenue。InmostpartsoftheMadrasandinpartofthe
BombayPresidency，therentispaiddirectlytothegovernmentby
theimmediatecultivator。IntheNorth—WesternProvinces，the
governmentmakesitsengagementwiththevillagecommunity
collectively，determiningthesharetobepaidbyeach
individual，butholdingthemjointlyresponsibleforeachother’s
default。ButinthegreaterpartofIndia，theimmediate
cultivatorshavenotobtainedaperpetuityoftenureatafixed
rent。Thegovernmentmanagesthelandontheprincipleonwhicha
goodIrishlandlordmanageshisestate:notputtingitupto
competition，notaskingthecultivatorswhattheywillpromiseto
pay，butdeterminingforitselfwhattheycanaffordtopay，and
definingitsdemandaccordingly。Inmanydistrictsaportionof
thecultivatorsareconsideredastenantsoftherest，the
governmentmakingitsdemandfromthoseonly（oftenanumerous
body）whoarelookeduponasthesuccessorsoftheoriginal
settlersorconquerorsofthevillage。Sometimestherentis
fixedonlyforoneyear，sometimesforthreeorfive;butthe
uniformtendencyofpresentpolicyistowardslongleases，
extending，inthenorthernprovincesofIndia，toatermof
thirtyyears。Thisarrangementhasnotexistedforasufficient
timetohaveshownbyexperience，howfarthemotivesto
improvementwhichthelongleasecreatesinthemindsofthe
cultivators，fallshortoftheinfluenceofaperpetual
settlement。（6*）Butthetwoplans，ofannualsettlementsandof
shortleases，areirrevocablycondemned。Theycanonlybesaidto
havesucceeded，incomparisonwiththeunlimitedoppressionwhich
existedbefore。Theyareapprovedbynobody，andwerenever
lookeduponinanyotherlightthanastemporaryarrangements，to
beabandonedwhenamorecompleteknowledgeofthecapabilities
ofthecountshouldafforddataforsomethingmorepermanent。
NOTES:
1。"Itisnotuncommonforatenantwithoutaleasetosellthe
bareprivilegeofoccupancyorpossessionofhisfarm，without
anyvisiblesignofimprovementhavingbeenmadebyhim，atfrom
tentosixteen，uptotwentyandevenfortyyears’purchaseof
therent。"——（DigestofEvidencetakenbyLordDevon’s
Commission，IntroductoryChapter。thecompileradds，"the
comparativetranquillityofthatdistrict"（Ulster）"mayperhaps
bemainlyattributabletothisfact。"
2。"Itisinthegreatmajorityofcasesnotareimbursementfor
outlayincurred，orimprovementseffectedontheland，butamere
lifeinsuranceorpurchaseofimmunityfromoutrage。"——（Digest，
utsupra）"Thepresenttenant—rightofUlster"（thewriter
judiciouslyremarks）"isanembryocopyhold。""Eventhere，ifthe
tenant—rightbedisregarded，andatenantbeejectedwithout
havingreceivedthepriceofhisgoodwill，outragesaregenerally
theconsequence。"——（Ch。viii。）"Thedisorganizedstateof
Tipperary，andtheagrariancombinationthoughtoutIreland，are
butamethodizedwartoobtaintheUlstertenant—right。"
3。EvilsoftheStateofIreland，theirCausesandtheirRemedy。
Page10。Apamphletcontaining，amongotherthings，anexcellent
digestandselectionofevidencefromthemasscollectedbythe
CommissionpresidedoverbyArchbishopWhately。
4。Evidence，p。851。
5。Mill’sHistoryofBritishIndia，bookvi，ch。8。
6。Sincethiswaswritten，theresolutionhasbeenadoptedbythe
Indiangovernmentofconvertingthelongleasesofthenorthern
provincesintoperpetualtenuresatfixedrents。
ThePrinciplesofPoliticalEconomy
byJohnStuartMill
Book2，Chapter10
MeansofAbolishingCottierTenancy
1。Whenthefirsteditionofthisworkwaswrittenand
published，thequestion，whatistobedonewithacottier
population，wastotheEnglishGovernmentthemosturgentof
practicalquestions。Themajorityofapopulationofeight
millions，havinglonggrovelledinhelplessinertnessandabject
povertyunderthecottiersystem，reducedbyitsoperationto
merefoodofthecheapestdescription，andtoanincapacityof
eitherdoingorwillinganythingfortheimprovementoftheir
lot，hadatlast，bythefailureofthatlowestqualityoffood，
beenplungedintoastateinwhichthealternativeseemedtobe
eitherdeath，ortobepermanentlysupportedbyotherpeople，or
aradicalchangeintheeconomicalarrangementsunderwhichit
hadhithertobeentheirmisfortunetolive。Suchanemergencyhad
compelledattentiontothesubjectfromthelegislatureandfrom
thenation，butitcouldhardlybesaidwithmuchresult;for，
theevilhavingoriginatedinasystemoflandtenancywhich
withdrewfromthepeopleeverymotivetoindustryorthrift
exceptthefearofstarvation，theremedyprovidedbyParliament
wastotakeawayeventhat，byconferringonthemalegalclaim
toeleemosynarysupport:while，towardscorrectingthecauseof
themischief，nothingwasdone，beyondvaincomplaints，thoughat
thepricetothenationaltreasuryoftenmillionssterlingfor
thedelay。
"Itisneedless，"（Iobserved）"toexpendanyargumentin
provingthattheveryfoundationoftheeconomicalevilsof
Irelandisthecottiersystem;thatwhilepeasantrentsfixedby
competitionarethepracticeofthecountry，toexpectindustry，
usefulactivity，anyrestraintonpopulationbutdeath，orany
thesmallestdiminutionofpoverty，istolookforfigson
thistlesandgrapesonthorns。Ifourpracticalstatesmenarenot
ripefortherecognitionofthisfact;orifwhilethey
acknowledgeitintheory，theyhavenotasufficientfeelingof
itsreality，tobecapableoffoundinguponitanycourseof
conduct;thereisstillanother，andapurelyphysical
consideration，fromwhichtheywillfinditimpossibletoescape。
Iftheonecroponwhichthepeoplehavehithertosupported
themselvescontinuestobeprecarious，eithersomenewandgreat
impulsemustbegiventoagriculturalskillandindustry，orthe
soilofIrelandcannolongerfeedanythinglikeitspresent
population。Thewholeproduceofthewesternhalfoftheisland，
leavingnothingforrent，willnotnowkeeppermanentlyin
existencethewholeofitspeople:andtheywillnecessarily
remainanannualchargeonthetaxationoftheempire，untilthey
arereducedeitherbyemigrationorbystarvationtoanumber
correspondingwiththelowstateoftheirindustry，orunlessthe
meansarefoundofmakingthatindustrymuchmoreproductive。"
Sincethesewordswerewritten，eventsunforeseenbyanyone
havesavedtheEnglishrulersofIrelandfromtheembarrassments
whichwouldhavebeenthejustpenaltyoftheirindifferenceand
wantofforesight。Ireland，undercottieragriculture，couldno
longersupplyfoodtoitspopulation:Parliament，bywayof
remedy，appliedastimulustopopulation，butnoneatallto
production;thehelp，however，whichhadnotbeenprovidedfor
thepeopleofIrelandbypoliticalwisdom，camefroman
unexpectedsource。Self—supportingemigration——theWakefield
system，broughtintoeffectonthevoluntaryprincipleandona
giganticscale（theexpensesofthosewhofollowedbeingpaid
fromtheearningsofthosewhowentbefore）has，forthepresent，
reducedthepopulationdowntothenumberforwhichtheexisting
agriculturalsystemcanfindemploymentandsupport。Thecensus
of1851，comparedwiththatof1841，showedinroundnumbersa
diminutionofpopulationofamillionandahalf。Thesubsequent
census（of1861）showsafurtherdiminutionofabouthalfa
million。TheIrishhavingthusfoundthewaytothatflourishing
continentwhichforgenerationswillbecapableofsupportingin
undiminishedcomforttheincreaseofthepopulationofthewhole
world;thepeasantryofIrelandhavinglearnttofixtheireyes
onaterrestrialparadisebeyondtheocean，asasurerefugeboth
fromtheoppressionoftheSaxonandfromthetyrannyofnature;
therecanbelittledoubtthathowevermuchtheemploymentfor
agriculturallabourmayhereafterbediminishedbythegeneral
introductionthroughoutIrelandofEnglishfarming—orevenif，
likethecountyofSutherland，allIrelandshouldbeturnedinto
agrazingfarm——thesupersededpeoplewouldmigratetoAmerica
withthesamerapidity，andasfreeofcosttothenation，asthe
millionofIrishwhowentthitherduringthethreeyearsprevious
to1851。Thosewhothinkthatthelandofacountryexistsfor
thesakeofafewthousandlandowners，andthataslongasrents
arepaid，societyandgovernmenthavefulfilledtheirfunction，
mayseeinthisconsummationahappyendtoIrishdifficulties。
Butthisisnotatime，noristhehumanmindnowina
condition，inwhichsuchinsolentpretensionscanbemaintained。
ThelandofIreland，thelandofeverycountry，belongstothe
peopleofthatcountry。Theindividualscalledlandownershaveno
right，inmoralityandjustice，toanythingbuttherent，or
compensationforitssaleablevalue。Withregardtotheland
itself，theparamountconsiderationis，bywhatmodeof
appropriationandofcultivationitcanbemademostusefulto
thecollectivebodyofitsinhabitants。Totheownersoftherent
itmaybeveryconvenientthatthebulkoftheinhabitants，
despairingofjusticeinthecountrywheretheyandtheir
ancestorshavelivedandsuffered，shouldseekonanother
continentthatpropertyinlandwhichisdeniedtothemathome。
Butthelegislatureoftheempireoughttoregardwithothereyes
theforcedexpatriationofmillionsofpeople。Whenthe
inhabitantsofacountryquitthecountryenmassebecauseits
Governmentwillnotmakeitaplacefitforthemtolivein，the
Governmentisjudgedandcondemned。Thereisnonecessityfor
deprivingthelandlordsofonefarthingofthepecuniaryvalueof
theirlegalrights;butjusticerequiresthattheactual
cultivatorsshouldbeenabledtobecomeinIrelandwhattheywill
becomeinAmerica—proprietorsofthesoilwhichtheycultivate。
Goodpolicyrequiresitnoless。