OCR Text |
Show OF THE RE~T OF LAND. [ CH. l~I. be n1ore distinct and incontrovertible than that the advantage which such inqividuals have derived frorn a capital e1nployed in agriculture, compared "vith a capital employed in cornn1erce and rnanufactures, cannot have been proportioned to the advantages derived by the country; or, in other \iVords, that the interests of individuals in the etnploytnent of capital, have not in this case been identified vvith the interest of the state. · 'Ibis position \vill be n1ade perfectly clear, if vve exatnine attentively ,what would be the relative effect t{) the individual and the state of the e1nployn1ent of a capital of 10,000 l. in agriculture, or in n1anufactures under the circumstances described. , Let us suppose that a capital of 10,000 l. n1ight be employed in con1n1erce or n1anufactures for twenty years, at a profit of about t\velve per cent., and that the capitalist n1ight retire, at the end of that term, \vith his fortune doubled. It is obvious that, to give the san1e encouragernent to the employnlent of such a capital in agriculture, the same or nearly the same advantages n1ust be offered to the individual. But in order to enable a person \Vho en1ploys his capital on rented land to conYert his 10,000 l. in the course of twenty years into 20,000 l. it is certain that he 1nust n1ake annually higher profits, in order to enable him to recover that part of his capital which he has actually sunk upon the land, and cannot withdraw at the end of the term; and then, if he has been an essential improver, he n1ust necessarily leave the land to his SEC. IX.] OF THE H.l:N'f OF LAND. 221 landlord, at the end of the lease, 'vorth a considerably higher rent, independently of any change in the value of the circulatilig lnedium, th.an at the con1n1encement of it. But these higher annual returns, 'vhich are necessary to the farn1er \Vith a ten1porary tenure to give hin1 the con1n1on profits of stock, are continued, in part at least, in the shape of rent at the end of the lease, and n1ust be 1SO 1nuch gained by the state . . ' . · In the case of the capital employed in commerce a~d tnanufactures, the profit to the state is proportioned to the profit derived by the individual ; in the case of the .~apital en1ployecl in agriculture it is n1uch greater ; and this vvould be true, ,vhether the produce \Vere estimated in n1oney, or in corn and labour. In either \vay, under circun1stances 'vhich in all probability have actually occurred, the profits to the state derived fron1 the capital employed in agriculture n1ight be estimated perhaps at fourteen or fifteen per cent .. , \V bile the profits to the individuals, in both cases, may have been only twelve per cent. Sir John Sinclair, in his Husbandry of Scotland has given the particulars of a fann in East Lothian' '- in which the rent is nearly half the produce; and th~ rent and profits together yield a return of fifty-six per cent. on the capital e1nployed. But the" rent and profi~s together are the real tneasure of the \Vealth derived by the country frorr1 the capital so en1ployed; and as the fann described is one where the. convertible husbandry is practised, a syste1n in \Vhich the greatest improvements have been maqc |