Rent, considered as the price paid for the use of land, is naturally the
highest which the tenant can afford to pay in the actual circumstances of
the land. In adjusting the terms of the lease, the landlord endeavours to
leave him no greater share of the produce than what is sufficient to keep up
the stock from which he furnishes the seed, pays the labour, and purchases
and maintains the cattle and other instruments of husbandry, together with
the ordinary profits of farming stock in the neighbourhood. This is
evidently the smallest share with which the tenant can content himself,
without being a loser, and the landlord seldom means to leave him any more.
Whatever part of the produce, or, what is the same thing, whatever part of
its price, is over and above this share, he naturally endeavours to reserve
to himself as the rent of his land, which is evidently the highest the
tenant can afford to pay in the actual circumstances of the land. Sometimes,
indeed, the liberality, more frequently the ignorance, of the landlord,
makes him accept of somewhat less than this portion ; and sometimes, too,
though more rarely, the ignorance of the tenant makes him undertake to pay
somewhat more, or to content himself with somewhat less, than the ordinary
profits of farming stock in the neighbourhood. This portion, however, may
still be considered as the natural rent of land, or the rent at which it is
naturally meant that land should, for the most part, be let.
The rent of land, it may be thought, is frequently no more than a reasonable
profit or interest for the stock laid out by the landlord upon its
improvement. This, no doubt, may be partly the case upon some occasions ;
for it can scarce ever be more than partly the case. The landlord demands a
rent even for unimproved land, and the supposed interest or profit upon the
expense of improvement is generally an addition to this original rent. Those
improvements, besides, are not always made by the stock of the landlord, but
sometimes by that of the tenant. When the lease comes to be renewed,
however, the landlord commonly demands the same augmentation of rent as if
they had been all made by his own.
He sometimes demands rent for what is altogether incapable of human
improvements. Kelp is a species of sea-weed, which, when burnt, yields an
alkaline salt, useful for making glass, soap, and for several other
purposes. It grows in several parts of Great Britain, particularly in
Scotland, upon such rocks only as lie within the high-water mark, which are
twice every day covered with the sea, and of which the produce, therefore,
was never augmented by human industry. The landlord, however, whose estate
is bounded by a kelp shore of this kind, demands a rent for it as much as
for his corn-fields.
The sea in the neighbourhood of the islands of Shetland is more than
commonly abundant in fish, which makes a great part of the subsistence of
their inhabitants. But, in order to profit by the produce of the water, they
must have a habitation upon the neighbouring land. The rent of the landlord
is in proportion, not to what the farmer can make by the land, but to what
he can make both by the land and the water. It is partly paid in sea-fish;
and one of the very few instances in which rent makes a part of the price of
that commodity, is to be found in that country.
The rent of land, therefore, considered as the price paid for the use of the
land, is naturally a monopoly price. It is not at all proportioned to what
the landlord may have laid out upon the improvement of the land, or to what
he can afford to take, but to what the farmer can afford to give.
Such parts only of the produce of land can commonly be brought to market, of
which the ordinary price is sufficient to replace the stock which must be
employed in bringing them thither, together with its ordinary profits. If
the ordinary price is more than this, the surplus part of it will naturally
go to the rent of the land. If it is not more, though the commodity may be
brought to market, it can afford no rent to the landlord. Whether the price
is, or is not more, depends upon the demand.
There are some parts of the produce of land, for which the demand must
always be such as to afford a greater price than what is sufficient to bring
them to market; and there are others for which it either may or may not be
such as to afford this greater price. The former must always afford a rent
to the landlord. The latter sometimes may and sometimes may not, according
to different circumstances.
Rent, it is to be observed, therefore, enters into the composition of the
price of commodities in a different way from wages and profit. High or low
wages and profit are the causes of high or low price ; high or low rent is
the effect of it. It is because high or low wages and profit must be paid,
in order to bring a particular commodity to market, that its price is high
or low. But it is because its price is high or low, a great deal more, or
very little more, or no more, than what is sufficient to pay those wages and
profit, that it affords a high rent, or a low rent, or no rent at all.
The particular consideration, first, of those parts of the produce of land
which always afford some rent ; secondly, of those which sometimes may and
sometimes may not afford rent ; and, thirdly, of the variations which, in
the different periods of improvement, naturally take place in the relative
value of those two different sorts of rude produce, when compared both with
one another and with manufactured commodities, will divide this chapter into
three parts.
PART I. - Of the Produce of Land which always affords Rent.
As men, like all other animals, naturally multiply in proportion to the
means of their subsistence, food is always more or less in demand. It can
always purchase or command a greater or smaller quantity of labour, and
somebody can always be found who is willing to do something in order to
obtain it. The quantity of labour, indeed, which it can purchase, is not
always equal to what it could maintain, if managed in the most economical
manner, on account of the high wages which are sometimes given to labour ;
but it can always purchase such a quantity of labour as it can maintain,
according to the rate at which that sort of labour is commonly maintained in
the neighbourhood.
But land, in almost any situation, produces a greater quantity of food than
what is sufficient to maintain all the labour necessary for bringing it to
market, in the most liberal way in which that labour is ever maintained. The
surplus, too, is always more than sufficient to replace the stock which
employed that labour, together with its profits. Something, therefore,
always remains for a rent to the landlord.
The most desert moors in Norway and Scotland produce some sort of pasture
for cattle, of which the milk and the increase are always more than
sufficient, not only to maintain all the labour necessary for tending them,
and to pay the ordinary profit to the farmer or the owner of the herd or
flock, but to afford some small rent to the landlord. The rent increases in
proportion to the goodness of the pasture. The same extent of ground not
only maintains a greater number of cattle, but as they we brought within a
smaller compass, less labour becomes requisite to tend them, and to collect
their produce. The landlord gains both ways; by the increase of the produce,
and by the diminution of the labour which must be maintained out of it.
The rent of land not only varies with its fertility, whatever be its
produce, but with its situation, whatever be its fertility. Land in the
neighbourhood of a town gives a greater rent than land equally fertile in a
distant part of the country. Though it may cost no more labour to cultivate
the one than the other, it must always cost more to bring the produce of the
distant land to market. A greater quantity of labour, therefore, must be
maintained out of it; and the surplus, from which are drawn both the profit
of the farmer and the rent of the landlord, must be diminished. But in
remote parts of the country, the rate of profit, as has already been shewn,
is generally higher than in the neighbourhood of a large town. A smaller
proportion of this diminished surplus, therefore, must belong to the
landlord.
Good roads, canals, and navigable rivers, by diminishing the expense of
carriage, put the remote parts of the country more nearly upon a level with
those in the neighbourhood of the town. They are upon that account the
greatest of all improvements. They encourage the cultivation of the remote,
which must always be the most extensive circle of the country. They are
advantageous to the town by breaking down the monopoly of the country in its
neighbourhood. They are advantageous even to that part of the country.
Though they introduce some rival commodities into the old market, they open
many new markets to its produce. Monopoly, besides, is a great enemy to good
management, which can never be universally established, but in consequence
of that free and universal competition which forces every body to have
recourse to it for the sake of self defence. It is not more than fifty years
ago, that some of the counties in the neighbourhood of London petitioned the
parliament against the extension of the turnpike roads into the remoter
counties. Those remoter counties, they pretended, from the cheapness of
labour, would be able to sell their grass and corn cheaper in the London
market than themselves, and would thereby reduce their rents, and ruin their
cultivation. Their rents, however, have risen, and their cultivation has
been improved since that time.
A corn field of moderate fertility produces a much greater quantity of food
for man, than the best pasture of equal extent. Though its cultivation
requires much more labour, yet the surplus which remains after replacing the
seed and maintaining all that labour, is likewise much greater. If a pound
of butcher's meat, therefore, was never supposed to be worth more than a
pound of bread, this greater surplus would everywhere be of greater value
and constitute a greater fund, both for the profit of the farmer and the
rent of the landlord. It seems to have done so universally in the rude
beginnings of agriculture.
But the relative values of those two different species of food, bread and
butcher's meat, are very different in the different periods of agriculture.
In its rude beginnings, the unimproved wilds, which then occupy the far
greater part of the country, are all abandoned to cattle. There is more
butcher's meat than bread; and bread, therefore, is the food for which there
is the greatest competition, and which consequently brings the greatest
price. At Buenos Ayres, we are told by Ulloa, four reals, one-and-twenty
pence halfpenny sterling, was, forty or fifty years ago, the ordinary price
of an ox, chosen from a herd of two or three hundred. He says nothing of the
price of bread, probably because he found nothing remarkable about it. An ox
there, he says, costs little more than the labour of catching him. But corn
can nowhere be raised without a great deal of labour ; and in a country
which lies upon the river Plate, at that time the direct road from Europe to
the silver mines of Potosi, the money-price of labour could be very cheap.
It is otherwise when cultivation is extended over the greater part of the
country. There is then more bread than butcher's meat. The competition
changes its direction, and the price of butcher's meat becomes greater
than the price of bread.
By the extension, besides, of cultivation, the unimproved wilds become
insufficient to supply the demand for butcher's meat. A great part of the
cultivated lands must be employed in rearing and fattening cattle ; of which
the price, therefore, must be sufficient to pay, not only the labour
necessary for tending them, but the rent which the landlord, and the profit
which the farmer, could have drawn from such land employed in tillage. The
cattle bred upon the most uncultivated moors, when brought to the same
market, are, in proportion to their weight or goodness, sold at the same
price as those which are reared upon the most improved land. The proprietors
of those moors profit by it, and raise the rent of their land in proportion
to the price of their cattle. It is not more than a century ago, that in
many parts of the Highlands of Scotland, butcher's meat was as cheap or
cheaper than even bread made of oatmeal The Union opened the market of
England to the Highland cattle. Their ordinary price, at present, is about
three times greater than at the beginning of the century, and the rents of
many Highland estates have been tripled and quadrupled in the same time. In
almost every part of Great Britain, a pound of the best butcher's meat is,
in the present times, generally worth more than two pounds of the best white
bread ; and in plentiful years it is sometimes worth three or four pounds.
It is thus that, in the progress of improvement, the rent and profit of
unimproved pasture come to be regulated in some measure by the rent and
profit of what is improved, and these again by the rent and profit of corn.
Corn is an annual crop ; butcher's meat, a crop which requires four or five
years to grow. As an acre of land, therefore, will produce a much smaller
quantity of the one species of food than of the other, the inferiority of
the quantity must be compensated by the superiority of the price. If it was
more than compensated, more corn-land would be turned into pasture ; and if
it was not compensated, part of what was in pasture would be brought back
into corn.
This equality, however, between the rent and profit of grass and those of
corn ; of the land of which the immediate produce is food for cattle, and of
that of which the immediate produce is food for men, must be understood to
take place only through the greater part of the improved lands of a great
country. In some particular local situations it is quite otherwise, and the
rent and profit of grass are much superior to what can be made by corn.
Thus, in the neighbourhood of a great town, the demand for milk, and for
forage to horses, frequently contribute, together with the high price of
butcher's meat, to raise the value of grass above what may be called its
natural proportion to that of corn. This local advantage, it is evident,
cannot be communicated to the lands at a distance.
Particular circumstances have sometimes rendered some countries so populous,
that the whole territory, like the lands in the neighbourhood of a great
town, has not been sufficient to produce both the grass and the corn
necessary for the subsistence of their inhabitants. Their lands, therefore,
have been principally employed in the production of grass, the more bulky
commodity, and which cannot be so easily brought from a great distance; and
corn, the food of the great body of the people, has been chiefly imported
from foreign countries. Holland is at present in this situation; and a
considerable part of ancient Italy seems to have been so during the
prosperity of the Romans. To feed well, old Cato said, as we are told by
Cicero, was the first and most profitable thing in the management of a
private estate ; to feed tolerably well, the second ; and to feed ill, the
third. To plough, he ranked only in the fourth place of profit and
advantage. Tillage, indeed, in that part of ancient Italy which lay in the
neighbour hood of Rome, must have been very much discouraged by the
distributions of corn which were frequently made to the people, either
gratuitously, or at a very low price. This corn was brought from the
conquered provinces, of which several, instead of taxes, were obliged to
furnish a tenth part of their produce at a stated price, about sixpence
a-peck, to the republic. The low price at which this corn was distributed to
the people, must necessarily have sunk the price of what could be brought to
the Roman market from Latium, or the ancient territory of Rome, and must
have discouraged its cultivation in that country.
In an open country, too, of which the principal produce is corn, a
well-inclosed piece of grass will frequently rent higher than any corn field
in its neighbourhood. It is convenient for the maintenance of the cattle
employed in the cultivation of the corn; and its high rent is, in this case,
not so properly paid from the value of its own produce, as from that of the
corn lands which are cultivated by means of it. It is likely to fall, if
ever the neighbouring lands are completely inclosed. The present high rent
of inclosed land in Scotland seems owing to the scarcity of inclosure, and
will probably last no longer than that scarcity. The advantage of inclosure
is greater for pasture than for corn. It saves the labour of guarding the
cattle, which feed better, too, when they are not liable to be disturbed by
their keeper or his dog.
But where there is no local advantage of this kind, the rent and profit of
corn, or whatever else is the common vegetable food of the people, must
naturally regulate upon the land which is fit for producing it, the rent and
profit of pasture.
The use of the artificial grasses, of turnips, carrots, cabbages, and the
other expedients which have been fallen upon to make an equal quantity of
land feed a greater number of cattle than when in natural grass, should
somewhat reduce, it might be expected, the superiority which, in an
improved country, the price of butcher's meat naturally has over that of
bread. It seems accordingly to have done so ; and there is some reason for
believing that, at least in the London market, the price of butcher's meat,
in proportion to the price of bread, is a good deal lower in the present
times than it was in the beginning of the last century.
In the Appendix to the life of Prince Henry, Doctor Birch has given us an
account of the prices of butcher's meat as commonly paid by that prince. It
is there said, that the four quarters of an ox, weighing six hundred pounds,
usually cost him nine pounds ten shillings, or thereabouts; that is
thirty-one shillings and eight-pence per hundred pounds weight. Prince Henry
died on the 6th of November 1612, in the nineteenth year of his age.
In March 1764, there was a parliamentary inquiry into the causes of the high
price of provisions at that time. It was then, among other proof to the same
purpose, given in evidence by a Virginia merchant, that in March 1763, he
had victualled his ships for twentyfour or twenty-five shillings the hundred
weight of beef, which he considered as the ordinary price; whereas, in that
dear year, he had paid twenty-seven shillings for the same weight and sort.
This high price in 1764 is, however, four shillings and eight-pence cheaper
than the ordinary price paid by Prince Henry ; and it is the best beef only,
it must be observed, which is fit to be salted for those distant voyages.
The price paid by Prince Henry amounts to 3d. 4/5ths per pound weight of the
whole carcase, coarse and choice pieces taken together ; and at that rate
the choice pieces could not have been sold by retail for less than 4˝d. or
5d. the pound.
In the parliamentary inquiry in 1764, the witnesses stated the price of the
choice pieces of the best beef to be to the consumer 4d. and 4˝d. the
pound; and the coarse pieces in general to be from seven farthings to 2˝d.
and 2žd.; and this, they said, was in general one halfpenny dearer than the
same sort of pieces had usually been sold in the month of March. But even
this high price is still a good deal cheaper than what we can well suppose
the ordinary retail price to have been in the time of Prince Henry.
During the first twelve years of the last century, the average price of the
best wheat at the Windsor market was £ 1:18:3˝d. the quarter of nine
Winchester bushels.
But in the twelve years preceding 1764 including that year, the average
price of the same measure of the best wheat at the same market was £
2:1:9˝d.
In the first twelve years of the last century, therefore, wheat appears to
have been a good deal cheaper, and butcher's meat a good deal dearer, than
in the twelve years preceding 1764, including that year.
In all great countries, the greater part of the cultivated lands are
employed in producing either food for men or food for cattle. The rent and
profit of these regulate the rent and profit of all other cultivated land.
If any particular produce afforded less, the land would soon be turned into
corn or pasture; and if any afforded more, some part of the lands in corn or
pasture would soon be turned to that produce.
Those productions, indeed, which require either a greater original expense
of improvement, or a greater annual expense of cultivation in order to fit
the land for them, appear commonly to afford, the one a greater rent, the
other a greater profit, than corn or pasture. This superiority, however,
will seldom be found to amount to more than a reasonable interest or
compensation for this superior expense.
In a hop garden, a fruit garden, a kitchen garden, both the rent of the
landlord, and the profit of the farmer, are generally greater than in acorn
or grass field. But to bring the ground into this condition requires more
expense. Hence a greater rent becomes due to the landlord. It requires, too,
a more attentive and skilful management. Hence a greater profit becomes due
to the farmer. The crop, too, at least in the hop and fruit garden, is more
precarious. Its price, therefore, besides compensating all occasional
losses, must afford something like the profit of insurance. The
circumstances of gardeners, generally mean, and always moderate, may satisfy
us that their great ingenuity is not commonly over-recompensed. Their
delightful art is practised by so many rich people for amusement, that
little advantage is to be made by those who practise it for profit; because
the persons who should naturally be their best customers, supply themselves
with all their most precious productions.
The advantage which the landlord derives from such improvements, seems at no
time to have been greater than what was sufficient to compensate the
original expense of making them. In the ancient husbandry, after the
vineyard, a well-watered kitchen garden seems to have been the part of the
farm which was supposed to yield the most valuable produce. But Democritus,
who wrote upon husbandry about two thousand years ago, and who was regarded
by the ancients as one of the fathers of the art, thought they did not act
wisely who inclosed a kitchen garden. The profit, he said, would not
compensate the expense of a stone-wall: and bricks (he meant, I suppose,
bricks baked in the sun) mouldered with the rain and the winter-storm, and
required continual repairs. Columella, who reports this judgment of
Democritus, does not controvert it, but proposes a very frugal method of
inclosing with a hedge of brambles and briars, which he says he had found by
experience to be both a lasting and an impenetrable fence ; but which, it
seems, was not commonly known in the time of Democritus. Palladius adopts
the opinion of Columella, which had before been recommended by Varro. In the
judgment of those ancient improvers. the produce of a kitchen garden had, it
seems, been little more than sufficient to pay the extraordinary culture and
the expense of watering ; for in countries so near the sun, it was thought
proper, in those times as in the present, to have the command of a stream of
water, which could be conducted to every bed in the garden. Through the
greater part of Europe, a kitchen garden is not at present supposed to
deserve a better inclosure than mat recommended by Columella. In Great
Britain, and some other northern countries, the finer fruits cannot Be
brought to perfection but by the assistance of a wall. Their price,
therefore, in such countries, must be sufficient to pay the expense of
building and maintaining what they cannot be had without. The fruit-wall
frequently surrounds the kitchen garden, which thus enjoys the benefit of an
inclosure which its own produce could seldom pay for.
That the vineyard, when properly planted and brought to perfection, was the
most valuable part of the farm, seems to have been an undoubted maxim in the
ancient agriculture, as it is in the modern, through all the wine countries.
But whether it was advantageous to plant a new vineyard, was a matter of
dispute among the ancient Italian husbandmen, as we learn from Columella. He
decides, like a true lover of all curious cultivation, in favour of the
vineyard; and endeavours to shew, by a comparison of the profit and expense,
that it was a most advantageous improvement. Such comparisons, however,
between the profit and expense of new projects are commonly very fallacious
; and in nothing more so than in agriculture. Had the gain actually made by
such plantations been commonly as great as he imagined it might have been,
there could have been no dispute about it. The same point is frequently at
this day a matter of controversy in the wine countries. Their writers on
agriculture, indeed, the lovers and promoters of high cultivation, seem
generally disposed to decide with Columella in favour of the vineyard. In
France, the anxiety of the proprietors of the old vineyards to prevent the
planting of any new ones, seems to favour their opinion, and to indicate a
consciousness in those who must have the experience, that this species of
cultivation is at present in that country more profitable than any other. It
seems, at the same time, however, to indicate another opinion, that this
superior profit can last no longer than the laws which at present restrain
the free cultivation of the vine. In 1731, they obtained an order of
council, prohibiting both the planting of new vineyards, and the renewal of
these old ones, of which the cultivation had been interrupted for two years,
without a particular permission from the king, to be granted only in
consequence of an information from the intendant of the province, certifying
that he had examined the land, and that it was incapable of any other
culture. The pretence of this order was the scarcity of corn and pasture,
and the superabundance of wine. But had this superabundance been real, it
would, without any order of council, have effectually prevented the
plantation of new vineyards, by reducing the profits of this species of
cultivation below their natural proportion to those of corn and pasture.
With regard to the supposed scarcity of corn occasioned by the
multiplication of vineyards, corn is nowhere in France more carefully
cultivated than in the wine provinces, where the land is fit for producing
it: as in Burgundy, Guienne, and the Upper Languedoc. The numerous hands
employed in the one species of cultivation necessarily encourage the other,
by affording a ready market for its produce. To diminish the number of those
who are capable of paying it, is surely a most unpromising expedient for
encouraging the cultivation of corn. It is like the policy which would
promote agriculture, by discouraging manufactures.
The rent and profit of those productions, therefore, which require either a
greater original expense of improvement in order to fit the land for them,
or a greater annual expense of cultivation, though often much superior to
those of corn and pasture, yet when they do no more than compensate such
extraordinary expense, are in reality regulated by the rent and profit of
those common crops.
It sometimes happens, indeed, that the quantity of land which can be fitted
for some particular produce, is too small to supply the effectual demand.
The whole produce can be disposed of to those who are willing to give
somewhat more than what is sufficient to pay the whole rent, wages, and
profit, necessary for raising and bringing it to market, according to their
natural rates, or according to the rates at which they are paid in the
greater part of other cultivated land. The surplus part of the price which
remains after defraying the whole expense of improvement and cultivation,
may commonly, in this case, and in this case only, bear no regular
proportion to the like surplus in corn or pasture, but may exceed it in
almost any degree; and the greater part of this excess naturally goes to the
rent of the landlord.
The usual and natural proportion, for example, between the rent and profit
of wine, and those of corn and pasture, must be understood to take place
only with regard to those vineyards which produce nothing but good common
wine, such as can be raised almost anywhere, upon any light, gravelly, or
sandy soil, and which has nothing to recommend it but its strength and
wholesomeness. It is with such vineyards only, that the common land of the
country can be brought into competition ; for with those of a peculiar
quality it is evident that it cannot.
The vine is more affected by the difference of soils than any other
fruit-tree. From some it derives a flavour which no culture or management
can equal, it is supposed, upon any other. This flavour, real or imaginary,
is sometimes peculiar to the produce of a few vineyards; sometimes it
extends through the greater part of a small district, and sometimes through
a considerable part of a large province. The whole quantity of such wines
that is brought to market falls short of the effectual demand, or the demand
of those who would be willing to pay the whole rent, profit, and wages,
necessary for preparing and bringing them thither, according to the ordinary
rate, or according to the rate at which they are paid in common vineyards.
The whole quantity, therefore, can be disposed of to those who are willing
to pay more, which necessarily raises their price above that of common wine.
The difference is greater or less, according as the fashionableness and
scarcity of the wine render the competition of the buyers more or less
eager. Whatever it be, the greater part of it goes to the rent of the
landlord. For though such vineyards are in general more carefully cultivated
than most others, the high price of the wine seems to be, not so much the
effect, as the cause of this careful cultivation. In so valuable a produce,
the loss occasioned by negligence is so great, as to force even the most
careless to attention. A small part of this high price, therefore, is
sufficient to pay the wages of the extraordinary labour bestowed upon their
cultivation, and the profits of the extraordinary stock which puts that
labour into motion.
The sugar colonies possessed by the European nations in the West Indies may
be compared to those precious vineyards. Their whole produce falls short of
the effectual demand of Europe, and can be disposed of to those who are
willing to give more than what is sufficient to pay the whole rent, profit,
and wages, necessary for preparing and bringing it to market, according to
the rate at which they are commonly paid by any other produce. In Cochin
China, the finest white sugar generally sells for three piastres the
quintal, about thirteen shillings and sixpence of our money, as we are told
by Mr Poivre {Voyages d'un Philosophe.}, a very careful observer of the
agriculture of that country. What is there called the quintal, weighs from a
hundred and fifty to two hundred Paris pounds, or a hundred and seventy-five
Paris pounds at a medium, which reduces the price of the hundred weight
English to about eight shillings sterling; not a fourth part of what is
commonly paid for the brown or muscovada sugars imported from our colonies,
and not a sixth part of what is paid for the finest white sugar. The greater
part of the cultivated lands in Cochin China are employed in producing corn
and rice, the food of the great body of the people. The respective prices of
corn, rice, and sugar, are there probably in the natural proportion, or in
that which naturally takes place in the different crops of the greater part
of cultivated land, and which recompenses the landlord and farmer, as nearly
as can be computed, according to what is usually the original expense of
improvement, and the annual expense of cultivation. But in our sugar
colonies, the price of sugar bears no such proportion to that of the produce
of a rice or corn field either in Europe or America. It is commonly said
that a sugar planter expects that the rum and the molasses should defray the
whole expense of his cultivation, and that his sugar should be all clear
profit. If this be true, for I pretend not to affirm it, it is as if a corn
farmer expected to defray the expense of his cultivation with the chaff and
the straw, and that the grain should be all clear profit. We see frequently
societies of merchants in London, and other trading towns, purchase waste
lands in our sugar colonies, which they expect to improve and cultivate with
profit, by means of factors and agents, notwithstanding the great
distance and the uncertain returns, from the defective administration of
justice in those countries. Nobody will attempt to improve and cultivate in
the same manner the most fertile lands of Scotland, Ireland, or the corn
provinces of North America, though, from the more exact administration of
justice in these countries, more regular returns might be expected.
In Virginia and Maryland, the cultivation of tobacco is preferred, as most
profitable, to that of corn. Tobacco might be cultivated with advantage
through the greater part of Europe ; but, in almost every part of Europe, it
has become a principal subject of taxation ; and to collect a tax from every
different farm in the country where this plant might happen to be
cultivated, would be more difficult, it has been supposed, than to levy one
upon its importation at the custom-house. The cultivation of tobacco has,
upon this account, been most absurdly prohibited through the greater part of
Europe, which necessarily gives a sort of monopoly to the countries where it
is allowed ; and as Virginia and Maryland produce the greatest quantity of
it, they share largely, though with some competitors, in the advantage of
this monopoly. The cultivation of tobacco, however, seems not to be so
advantageous as that of sugar. I have never even heard of any tobacco
plantation that was improved and cultivated by the capital of merchants who
resided in Great Britain; and our tobacco colonies send us home no such
wealthy planters as we see frequently arrive from our sugar islands. Though,
from the preference given in those colonies to the cultivation of tobacco
above that of corn, it would appear that the effectual demand of Europe for
tobacco is not completely supplied, it probably is more nearly so than that
for sugar; and though the present price of tobacco is probably more than
sufficient to pay the whole rent, wages, and profit, necessary for preparing
and bringing it to market, according to the rate at which they are commonly
paid in corn land, it must not be so much more as the present price of
sugar. Our tobacco planters, accordingly, have shewn the same fear of the
superabundance of tobacco, which the proprietors of the old vineyards in
France have of the superabundance of wine. By act of assembly, they have
restrained its cultivation to six thousand plants, supposed to yield a
thousand weight of tobacco, for every negro between sixteen and sixty years
of age. Such a negro, over and above this quantity of tobacco, can manage,
they reckon, four acres of Indian corn. To prevent the market from being
overstocked, too, they have sometimes, in plentiful years, we are told by Dr
Douglas {Douglas's Summary,vol. ii. p. 379, 373.} (I suspect he has been ill
informed), burnt a certain quantity of tobacco for every negro, in the same
manner as the Dutch are said to do of spices. If such violent methods are
necessary to keep up the present price of tobacco, the superior advantage of
its culture over that of corn, if it still has any, will not probably be of
long continuance.
It is in this manner that the rent of the cultivated land, of which the
produce is human food, regulates the rent of the greater part of other
cultivated land. No particular produce can long afford less, because the
land would immediately be turned to another use; and if any particular
produce commonly affords more, it is because the quantity of land which can
be fitted for it is too small to supply the effectual demand.
In Europe, corn is the principal produce of land, which serves immediately
for human food. Except in particular situations, therefore, the rent of corn
land regulates in Europe that of all other cultivated land. Britain need
envy neither the vineyards of France, nor the olive plantations of Italy.
Except in particular situations, the value of these is regulated by that of
corn, in which the fertility of Britain is not much inferior to that of
either of those two countries.
If, in any country, the common and favourite vegetable food of the people
should be drawn from a plant of which the most common land, with the same,
or nearly the same culture, produced a much greater quantity than the most
fertile does of corn ; the rent of the landlord, or the surplus quantity of
food which would remain to him, after paying the labour, and replacing the
stock of the farmer, together with its ordinary profits, would necessarily
be much greater. Whatever was the rate at which labour was commonly
maintained in that country, this greater surplus could always maintain a
greater quantity of it, and, consequently, enable the landlord to purchase
or command a greater quantity of it. The real value of his rent, his real
power and authority, his command of the necessaries and conveniencies of
life with which the labour of other people could supply him, would
necessarily be much greater.
A rice field produces a much greater quantity of food than the most fertile
corn field. Two crops in the year, from thirty to sixty bushels each, are
said to be the ordinary produce of an acre. Though its cultivation,
therefore, requires more labour, a much greater surplus remains after
maintaining all that labour. In those rice countries, therefore, where
rice is the common and favourite vegetable food of the people, and where the
cultivators are chiefly maintained with it, a greater share of this greater
surplus should belong to the landlord than in corn countries. In Carolina,
where the planters, as in other British colonies, are generally both farmers
and landlords, and where rent, consequently, is confounded with profit,
the cultivation of rice is found to be more profitable than that of corn,
though their fields produce only one crop in the year, and though, from the
prevalence of the customs of Europe, rice is not there the common and
favourite vegetable food of the people.
A good rice field is a bog at all seasons, and at one season a bog covered
with water. It is unfit either for corn, or pasture, or vineyard, or,
indeed, for any other vegetable produce that is very useful to men ; and the
lands which are fit for those purposes are not fit for rice. Even in the
rice countries, therefore, the rent of rice lands cannot regulate the rent
of the other cuitivated land which can never be turned to that produce.
The food produced by a field of potatoes is not inferior in quantity to that
produced by a field of rice, and much superior to what is produced by a
field of wheat. Twelve thousand weight of potatoes from an acre of land is
not a greater produce than two thousand weight of wheat. The food or solid
nourishment, indeed, which can be drawn from each of those two plants, is
not altogether in proportion to their weight, on account of the watery
nature of potatoes. Allowing, however, half the weight of this root to go to
water, a very large allowance, such an acre of potatoes will still produce
six thousand weight of solid nourishment, three times the quantity produced
by the acre of wheat. An acre of potatoes is cultivated with less expense
than an acre of wheat; the fallow, which generally precedes the sowing of
wheat, more than compensating the hoeing and other extraordinary culture
which is always given to potatoes. Should this root ever become in any part
of Europe, like rice in some rice countries, the common and favourite
vegetable food of the people, so as to occupy the same proportion of the
lands in tillage, which wheat and other sorts of grain for human food do at
present, the same quantity of cultivated land would maintain a much greater
number of people ; and the labourers being generally fed with potatoes, a
greater surplus would remain after replacing all the stock, and maintaining
all the labour employed in cultivation. A greater share of this surplus,
too, would belong to the landlord. Population would increase, and rents
would rise much beyond what they are at present.
The land which is fit for potatoes, is fit for almost every other useful
vegetable. If they occupied the same proportion of cultivated land which
corn does at present, they would regulate, in the same manner, the rent of
the greater part of other cultivated land.
In some parts of Lancashire, it is pretended, I have been told, that bread
of oatmeal is a heartier food for labouring people than wheaten bread, and 1
have frequently heard the same doctrine held in Scotland. I am, however,
somewhat doubtful of the truth of if. The common people in Scotland, who are
fed with oatmeal, are in general neither so strong nor so handsome as the
same rank of people in England, who are fed with wheaten bread. They neither
work so well, nor look so well; and as there is not the same difference
between the people of fashion in the two countries, experience would seem to
shew, that the food of the common people in Scotland is not so suitable to
the human constitution as that of their neighbours of the same rank in
England. But it seems to be otherwise with potatoes. The chairmen, porters,
and coal-heavers in London, and those unfortunate women who live by
prostitution, the strongest men and the most beautiful women perhaps in the
British dominions, are said to be, the greater part of them, from the lowest
rank of people in Ireland. who are generally fed with this root. No food can
afford a more decisive proof of its nourishing quality, or of its being
peculiarly suitable to the health of the human constitution.
It is difficult to preserve potatoes through the year, and impossible to
store them like corn, for two or three years together. The fear of not being
able to sell them before they rot, discourages their cultivation, and is,
perhaps, the chief obstacle to their ever becoming in any great country,
like bread, the principal vegetable food of all the different ranks of the
people.
PART II. - Of the Produce of Land, which sometimes does, and sometimes
does not, afford Rent.
Human food seems to be the only produce of land, which always and
necessarily affords some rent to the landlord. Other sorts of produce
sometimes may, and sometimes may not, according to different circumstances.
After food, clothing and lodging are the two great wants of mankind.
Land, in its original rude state, can afford the materials of clothing and
lodging to a much greater number of people than it can feed. In its improved
state, it can sometimes feed a greater number of people than it can supply
with those materials; at least in the way in which they require them, and
are willing to pay for them. In the one state, therefore, there is always a
superabundance of these materials, which are frequently, upon that account,
of little or no value. In the other, there is often a scarcity, which
necessarily augments their value. In the one state, a great part of them is
thrown away as useless and the price of what is used is considered as equal
only to the labour and expense of fitting it for use, and can, therefore,
afford no rent to the landlord. In the other, they are all made use of, and
there is frequently a demand for more than can be had. Somebody is always
willing to give more for every part of them, than what is sufficient to pay
the expense of bringing them to market. Their price, therefore, can
always afford some rent to the landlord.
The skins of the larger animals were the original materials of clothing.
Among nations of hunters and shepherds, therefore, whose food consists
chiefly in the flesh of those animals, everyman, by providing himself with
food, provides himself with the materials of more clothing than he can wear.
If there was no foreign commerce, the greater part of them would be thrown
away as things of no value. This was probably the case among the hunting
nations of North America, before their country was discovered by the
Europeans, with whom they now exchange their surplus peltry, for blankets,
fire-arms, and brandy, which gives it some value. In the present commercial
state of the known world, the most barbarous nations, I believe, among whom
land property is established, have some foreign commerce of this kind, and
find among their wealthier neighbours such a demand for all the materials of
clothing, which their land produces, and which can neither be wrought up nor
consumed at home, as raises their price above what it costs to send them to
those wealthier neighbours. It affords, therefore, some rent to the
landlord. When the greater part of the Highland cattle were consumed on
their own hills, the exportation of their hides made the most considerable
article of the commerce of that country, and what they were exchanged for
afforded some addition to the rent of the Highland estates. The wool of
England, which in old times, could neither be consumed nor wrought up at
home, found a market in the then wealthier and more industrious country of
Flanders, and its price afforded something to the rent of the land which
produced it. In countries not better cultivated than England was then, or
than the Highlands of Scotland are now, and which had no foreign commerce,
the materials of clothing would evidently be so superabundant, that a great
part of them would be thrown away as useless, and no part could afford any
rent to the landlord.
The materials of lodging cannot always be transported to so great a distance
as those of clothing, and do not so readily become an object of foreign
commerce. When they are superabundant in the country which produces them, it
frequently happens, even in the present commercial state of the world, that
they are of no value to the landlord. A good stone quarry in the
neighbourhood of London would afford a considerable rent. In many parts of
Scotland and Wales it affords none. Barren timber for building is of great
value in a populous and well-cultivated country, and the land which produces
it affords a considerable rent. But in many parts of North America, the
landlord would be much obliged to any body who would carry away the greater
part of his large trees. In some parts of the Highlands of Scotland, the
bark is the only part of the wood which, for want of roads and
water-carriage, can be sent to market ; the timber is left to rot upon the
ground. When the materials of lodging are so superabundant, the part made
use of is worth only the labour and expense of fitting it for that use. It
affords no rent to the landlord, who generally grants the use of it to
whoever takes the trouble of asking it. The demand of wealthier nations,
however, sometimes enables him to get a rent for it. The paving of the
streets of London has enabled the owners of some barren rocks on the coast
of Scotland to draw a rent from what never afforded any before. The woods of
Norway, and of the coasts of the Baltic, find a market in many parts of
Great Britain, which they could not find at home, and thereby afford some
rent to their proprietors.
Countries are populous, not in proportion to the number of people whom their
produce can clothe and lodge, but in proportion to that of those whom it can
feed. When food is provided, it is easy to find the necessary clothing and
lodging. But though these are at hand, it may often be difficult to find
food. In some parts of the British dominions, what is called a house may be
built by one day's labour of one man. The simplest species of clothing, the
skins of animals, require somewhat more labour to dress and prepare them for
use. They do not, however, require a great deal. Among savage or barbarous
nations, a hundredth, or little more than a hundredth part of the labour of
the whole year, will be sufficient to provide them with such clothing and
lodging as satisfy the greater part of the people. All the other ninety-nine
parts are frequently no more than enough to provide them with food.
But when, by the improvement and cultivation of land, the labour of one
family can provide food for two, the labour of half the society becomes
sufficient to provide food for the whole. The other half, therefore, or at
least the greater part of them, can be employed in providing other things,
or in satisfying the other wants and fancies of mankind. Clothing and
lodging, household furniture, and what is called equipage, are the principal
objects of the greater part of those wants and fancies. The rich man
consumes no more food than his poor neighbour. In quality it may be very
different, and to select and prepare it may require more labour and art;
but in quantity it is very nearly the same. But compare the spacious palace
and great wardrobe of the one, with the hovel and the few rags of the other,
and you will be sensible that the difference between their clothing,
lodging, and household furniture, is almost as great in quantity as it is in
quality. The desire of food is limited in every man by the narrow capacity
of the human stomach; but the desire of the conveniencies and ornaments
of building, dress, equipage, and household furniture, seems to have no limit
or certain boundary. Those, therefore, who have the command of more food
than they themselves can consume, are always willing to exchange the
surplus, or, what is the same thing, the price of it, for gratifications of
this other kind. What is over and above satisfying the limited desire, is
given for the amusement of those desires which cannot be satisfied, but seem
to be altogether endless. The poor, in order to obtain food, exert
themselves to gratify those fancies of the rich ; and to obtain it more
certainly, they vie with one another in the cheapness and perfection of
their work. The number of workmen increases with the increasing quantity of
food, or with the growing improvement and cultivation of the lands ; and as
the nature of their business admits of the utmost subdivisions of labour,
the quantity of materials which they can work up, increases in a much
greater proportion than their numbers. Hence arises a demand for every sort
of material which human invention can employ, either usefully or
ornamentally, in building, dress, equipage, or household furniture ; for the
fossils and minerals contained in the bowels of the earth, the precious
metals, and the precious stones.
Food is, in this manner, not only the original source of rent, but every
other part of the produce of land which afterwards affords rent, derives
that part of its value from the improvement of the powers of labour in
producing food, by means of the improvement and cultivation of land.
Those other parts of the produce of land, however, which afterwards afford
rent, do not afford it always. Even in improved and cultivated countries,
the demand for them is not always such as to afford a greater price than
what is sufficient to pay the labour, and replace, together with its
ordinary profits, the stock which must be employed in bringing them to
market. Whether it is or is not such, depends upon different circumstances.
Whether a coal mine, for example, can afford any rent, depends partly upon
its fertility, and partly upon its situation.
A mine of any kind may be said to be either fertile or barren, according as
the quantity of mineral which can be brought from it by a certain quantity
of labour, is greater or less than what can be brought by an equal quantity
from the greater part of other mines of the same kind.
Some coal mines, advantageously situated, cannot be wrought on account of
their barrenness. The produce does not pay the expense. They can afford
neither profit nor rent.
There are some, of which the produce is barely sufficient to pay the labour,
and replace, together with its ordinary profits, the stock employed in
working them. They afford some profit to the undertaker of the work, but no
rent to the landlord. They can be wrought advantageously by nobody but the
landlord, who, being himself the undertaker of the work, gets the ordinary
profit of the capital which he employs in it. Many coal mines in Scotland
are wrought in this manner, and can be wrought in no other. The landlord
will allow nobody else to work them without paying some rent, and nobody can
afford to pay any.
Other coal mines in the same country, sufficiently fertile, cannot be
wrought on account of their situation. A quantity of mineral, sufficient
to defray the expense of working, could be brought from the mine by the
ordinary, or even less than the ordinary quantity of labour: but in an
inland country, thinly inhabited, and without either good roads or
water-carriage, this quantity could not be sold.
Coals are a less agreeable fuel than wood : they are said too to be less
wholesome. The expense of coals, therefore, at the place where they are
consumed, must generally be somewhat less than that of wood.
The price of wood, again, varies with the state of agriculture, nearly in
the same manner, and exactly for the same reason, as the price of cattle. In
its rude beginnings, the greater part of every country is covered with wood,
which is then a mere incumbrance, of no value to the landlord, who would
gladly give it to any body for the cutting. As agriculture advances, the
woods are partly cleared by the progress of tillage, and partly go to decay
in consequence of the increased number of cattle. These, though they do not
increase in the same proportion as corn, which is altogether the acquisition
of human industry, yet multiply under the care and protection of men, who
store up in the season of plenty what may maintain them in that of scarcity
; who, through the whole year, furnish them with a greater quantity of food
than uncultivated nature provides for them; and who, by destroying and
extirpating their enemies, secure them in the free enjoyment of all that she
provides.Numerous herds of cattle, when allowed to wander through the woods,
though they do not destroy the old trees, hinder any young ones from coming
up ; so that, in the course of a century or two, the whole forest goes to
ruin. The scarcity of wood then raises its price. It affords a good rent ;
and the landlord sometimes finds that he can scarce employ his best lands
more advantageously than in growing barren timber, of which the greatness of
the profit often compensates the lateness of the returns. This seems, in the
present times, to be nearly the state of things in several parts of Great
Britain, where the profit of planting is found to be equal to that of either
corn or pasture. The advantage which the landlord derives from planting can
nowhere exceed, at least for any considerable time, the rent which these
could afford him ; and in an inland country, which is highly cuitivated, it
will frequently not fall much short of this rent. Upon the sea-coast of a
well-improved country, indeed, if coals can conveniently be had for fuel, it
may sometimes be cheaper to bring barren timber for building from less
cultivated foreign countries than to raise it at home. In the new town of
Edinburgh, built within these few years, there is not, perhaps, a single
stick of Scotch timber.
Whatever may be the price of wood, if that of coals is such that the expense
of a coal fire is nearly equal to that of a wood one we may be assured, that
at that place, and in these circumstances, the price of coals is as high as
it can be. It seems to be so in some of the inland parts of England,
particularly in Oxfordshire, where it is usual, even in the fires of the
common people, to mix coals and wood together, and where the difference in
the expense of those two sorts of fuel cannot, therefore, be very great.
Coals, in the coal countries, are everywhere much below this highest price.
If they were not, they could not bear the expense of a distant carriage,
either by land or by water. A small quantity only could be sold; and the
coal masters and the coal proprietors find it more for their interest to
sell a great quantity at a price somewhat above the lowest, than a small
quantity at the highest. The most fertile coal mine, too, regulates the
price of coals at all the other mines in its neighbourhood. Both the
proprietor and the undertaker of the work find, the one that he can get a
greater rent, the other that he can get a greater profit, by somewhat
underselling all their neighbours. Their neighbours are soon obliged to sell
at the same price, though they cannot so well afford it, and though it
always diminishes, and sometimes takes away altogether, both their rent and
their profit. Some works are abandoned altogether ; others can afford no
rent, and can be wrought only by the proprietor.
The lowest price at which coals can be sold for any considerable time, is.
like that of all other commodities, the price which is barely sufficient to
replace, together with its ordinary profits, the stock which must be
employed in bringing them to market. At a coal mine for which the landlord
can get no rent, but, which he must either work himself or let it alone
altogether, the price of coals must generally be nearly about this price.
Rent, even where coals afford one, has generally a smaller share in their
price than in that of most other parts of the rude produce of land. The rent
of an estate above ground, commonly amounts to what is supposed to be a
third of the gross produce; and it is generally a rent certain and
independent of the occasional variations in the crop. In coal mines, a fifth
of the gross produce is a very great rent, a tenth the common rent ; and it
is seldom a rent certain, but depends upon the occasional variations in the
produce. These are so great, that in a country where thirty years purchase
is considered as a moderate price for the property of a landed estate, ten
years purchase is regarded as a good price for that of a coal mine.
The value of a coal mine to the proprietor, frequently depends as much upon
its situation as upon its fertility. That of a metallic mine depends more
upon its fertility, and less upon its situation. The coarse, and still more
the precious metals, when separated from the ore, are so valuable, that they
can generally bear the expense of a very long land, and of the most distant
sea carriage. Their market is not confined to the countries in the
neighbourhood of the mine, but extends to the whole world. The copper of
Japan makes an article of commerce in Europe; the iron of Spain in that of
Chili and Peru. The silver of Peru finds its way, not only to Europe, but
from Europe to China.
The price of coals in Westmoreland or Shropshire can have little effect on
their price at Newcastle ; and their price in the Lionnois can have none at
all. The productions of such distant coal mines can never be brought into
competition with one another. But the productions of the most distant
metallic mines frequently may, and in fact commonly are.
The price, therefore, of the coarse, and still more that of the precious
metals, at the most fertile mines in the world, must necessarily more or
less affect their price at every other in it. The price of copper in Japan
must have some influence upon its price at the copper mines in Europe. The
price of silver in Peru, or the quantity either of labour or of other goods
which it will purchase there, must have some influence on its price, not
only at the silver mines of Europe, but at those of China. After the
discovery of the mines of Peru, the silver mines of Europe were, the greater
part of them, abandoned. The value of silver was so much reduced, that their
produce could no longer pay the expense of working them, or replace, with a
profit, the food, clothes, lodging, and other necessaries which were
consumed in that operation. This was the case, too, with the mines of Cuba
and St. Domingo, and even with the ancient mines of Peru, after the
discovery of those of Potosi.
The price of every metal, at every mine, therefore, being regulated in some
measure by its price at the most fertile mine in the world that is actually
wrought, it can, at the greater part of mines, do very little more than pay
the expense of working, and can seldom afford a very high rent to the
landlord. Rent accordingly, seems at the greater part of mines to have but a
small share in the price of the coarse, and a still smaller in that of the
precious metals. Labour and profit make up the greater part of both.
A sixth part of the gross produce may be reckoned the average rent of the
tin mines of Cornwall, the most fertile that are known in the world, as we
are told by the Rev. Mr. Borlace, vice-warden of the stannaries. Some, he
says, afford more, and some do not afford so much. A sixth part of the gross
produce is the rent, too, of several very fertile lead mines in Scotland.
In the silver mines of Peru, we are told by Frezier and Ulloa, the
proprietor frequently exacts no other acknowledgment from the undertaker of
the mine, but that he will grind the ore at his mill, paying him the
ordinary multure or price of grinding. Till 1736, indeed, the tax of the
king of Spain amounted to one fifth of the standard silver, which till then
might be considered as the real rent of the greater part of the silver mines
of Peru, the richest which have been known in the world. If there had been
no tax, this fifth would naturally have belonged to the landlord, and many
mines might have been wrought which could not then be wrought, because they
could not afford this tax. The tax of the duke of Cornwall upon tin is
supposed to amount to more than five per cent. or one twentieth part of the
value ; and whatever may be his proportion, it would naturally, too, belong
to the proprietor of the mine, if tin was duty free. But if you add one
twentieth to one sixth, you will find that the whole average rent of the tin
mines of Cornwall, was to the whole average rent of the silver mines of
Peru, as thirteen to twelve. But the silver mines of Peru are not now able
to pay even this low rent; and the tax upon silver was, in 1736, reduced
from one fifth to one tenth. Even this tax upon silver, too, gives more
temptation to smuggling than the tax of one twentieth upon tin; and
smuggling must be much easier in the precious than in the bulky commodity.
The tax of the king of Spain, accordingly, is said to be very ill paid, and
that of the duke of Cornwall very well. Rent, therefore, it is probable,
makes a greater part of the price of tin at the most fertile tin mines than
it does of silver at the most fertile silver mines in the world. After
replacing the stock employed in working those different mines, together with
its ordinary profits, the residue which remains to the proprietor is
greater, it seems, in the coarse, than in the precious metal.
Neither are the profits of the undertakers of silver mines commonly very
great in Peru.The same most respectable and well-informed authors acquaint
us, that when any person undertakes to work a new mine in Peru, he is
universally looked upon as a man destined to bankruptcy and ruin, and is
upon that account shunned and avoided by every body.Mining, it seems, is
considered there in the same light as here, as a lottery, in which the
prizes do not compensate the blanks, though the greatness of some tempts
many adventurers to throw away their fortunes in such unprosperous projects.
As the sovereign, however, derives a considerable part of his revenue from the produce
of silver mines, the law in Peru gives every possible encouragement to the
discovery and working of new ones. Whoever discovers a new mine, is entitled
to measure off two hundred and forty-six feet in length, according to what
he supposes to be the direction of the vein, and half as much in breadth. He
becomes proprietor of this portion of the mine, and can work it without
paving any acknowledgment to the landlord. The interest of the duke of
Cornwall has given occasion to a regulation nearly of the same kind in that
ancient dutchy. In waste and uninclosed lands, any person who discovers a
tin mine may mark out its limits to a certain extent, which is called
bounding a mine. The bounder becomes the real proprietor of the mine, and
may either work it himself, or give it in lease to another, without the
consent of the owner of the land, to whom, however, a very small
acknowdedgment must be paid upon working it. In both regulations, the sacred
rights of private property are sacrificed to the supposed interests of
public revenue.
The same encouragement is given in Peru to the discovery and working of new
gold mines; and in gold the king's tax amounts only to a twentieth part of
the standard rental. It was once a fifth, and afterwards a tenth, as in
silver; but it was found that the work could not bear even the lowest of
these two taxes. If it is rare, however, say the same authors, Frezier and
Ulloa, to find a person who has made his fortune by a silver, it is still
much rarer to find one who has done so by a gold mine. This twentieth part
seems to be the whole rent which is paid by the greater part of the gold
mines of Chili and Peru. Gold, too, is much more liable to be smuggled than
even silver; not only on account of the superior value of the metal in
proportion to its bulk, but on account of the peculiar way in which nature
produces it. Silver is very seldom found virgin, but, like most other
metals, is generally mineralized with some other body, from which it is
impossible to separate it in such quantities as will pay for the expense,
but by a very laborious and tedious operation, which cannot well be carried
on but in work-houses erected for the purpose, and, therefore, exposed to
the inspection of the king's officers. Gold, on the contrary, is almost
always found virgin. It is sometimes found in pieces of some bulk ; and,
even when mixed, in small and almost insensible particles, with sand, earth,
and other extraneous bodies, it can be separated from them by a very short
and simple operation, which can be carried on in any private house by any
body who is possessed of a small quantity of mercury. If the king's tax,
therefore, is but ill paid upon silver, it is likely to be much worse paid
upon gold; and rent must make a much smaller part of the price of gold than
that of silver.
The lowest price at which the precious metals can be sold, or the smallest
quantity of other goods for which they can be exchanged, during any
considerable time, is regulated by the same principles which fix the lowest
ordinary price of all other goods. The stock which must commonly be
employed, the food, clothes, and lodging, which must commonly be consumed in
bringing them from the mine to the market, determine it. It must at least be
sufficient to replace that stock, with the ordinary profits.
Their highest price, however, seems not to be necessarily determined by any
thing but the actual scarcity or plenty of these metals themselves. It is
not determined by that of any other commodity, in the same manner as the
price of coals is by that of wood, beyond which no scarcity can ever raise
it. Increase the scarcity of gold to a certain degree, and the smallest bit
of it may become more precious than a diamond, and exchange for a greater
quantity of other goods.
The demand for those metals arises partly from their utility, and partly
from their beauty. If you except iron, they are more useful than, perhaps,
any other metal. As they are less liable to rust and impurity, they can more
easily be kept clean; and the utensils, either of the table or the kitchen,
are often, upon that account, more agreeable when made of them. A silver
boiler is more cleanly than a lead, copper, or tin one; and the same quality
would render a gold boiler still better than a silver one. Their principal
merit, however, arises from their beauty, which renders them peculiarly fit
for the ornaments of dress and furniture. No paint or dye can give so
splendid a colour as gilding. The merit of their beauty is greatly enhanced
by their scarcity. With the greater part of rich people, the chief enjoyment
of riches consists in the parade of riches ; which, in their eye, is never
so complete as when they appear to possess those decisive marks of opulence
which nobody can possess but themselves. In their eyes, the merit of an
object, which is in any degree either useful or beautiful, is greatly
enhanced by its scarcity, or by the great labour which it requires to
collect any considerable quantity of it; a labour which nobody can afford to
pay but themselves. Such objects they are willing to purchase at a higher
price than things much more beautiful and useful, but more common. These
qualities of utility, beauty, and scarcity, are the original foundation of
the high price of those metals, or of the great quantity of other goods for
which they can everywhere be exchanged. This value was antecedent to,
and independent of their being employed as coin, and was the quality which
fitted them for that employment. That employment, however, by occasioning a
new demand, and by diminishing the quantity which could be employed in any
other way, may have afterwards contributed to keep up or increase their
value.
The demand for the precious stones arises altogether from their beauty. They
are of no use but as ornaments ; and the merit of their beauty is greatly
enhanced by their scarcity, or by the difficulty and expense of getting them
from the mine. Wages and profit accordingly make up, upon most occasions,
almost the whole of the high price. Rent comes in but for a very small
share, frequently for no share ; and the most fertile mines only afford any
considerable rent. When Tavernier, a jeweller, visited the diamond mines of
Golconda and Visiapour, he was informed that the sovereign of the country,
for whose benefit they were wrought, had ordered all of them to be shut up
except those which yielded the largest and finest stones. The other, it
seems, were to the proprietor not worth the working.
As the prices, both of the precious metals and of the precious stones, is
regulated all over the world by their price at the most fertile mine in it,
the rent which a mine of either can afford to its proprietor is in
proportion, not to its absolute, but to what may be called its relative
fertility, or to its superiority over other mines of the same kind. If new
mines were discovered, as much superior to those of Potosi, as they were
superior to those of Europe, the value of silver might be so much degraded
as to render even the mines of Potosi not worth the working. Before the
discovery of the Spanish West Indies, the most fertile mines in Europe may
have afforded as great a rent to their proprietors as the richest mines in
Peru do at present. Though the quantity of silver was much less, it might
have exchanged for an equal quantity of other goods, and the proprietor's
share might have enabled him to purchase or command an equal quantity either
of labour or of commodities.
The value, both of the produce and of the rent, the real revenue which they
afforded, both to the public and to the proprietor, might have been the
same.
The most abundant mines, either of the precious metals, or of the precious
stones, could add little to the wealth of the world. A produce, of which the
value is principally derived from its scarcity, is necessarily degraded by
its abundance. A service of plate, and the other frivolous ornaments of
dress and furniture, could be purchased for a smaller quantity of
commodities ; and in this would consist the sole advantage which the world
could derive from that abundance.
It is otherwise in estates above ground. The value, both of their produce
and of their rent, is in proportion to their absolute, and not to their
relative fertility. The land which produces a certain quantity of food,
clothes, and lodging, can always feed, clothe, and lodge, a certain number
of people ; and whatever may be the proportion of the landlord, it will
always give him a proportionable command of the labour of those people, and
of the commodities with which that labour can supply him. The value of the
most barren land is not diminished by the neighbourhood of the most fertile.
On the contrary, it is generally increased by it. The great number of people
maintained by the fertile lands afford a market to many parts of the produce
of the barren, which they could never have found among those whom their own
produce could maintain.
Whatever increases the fertility of land in producing food, increases not
only the value of the lands upon which the improvement is bestowed, but
contributes likewise to increase that of many other lands, by creating a new
demand for their produce. That abundance of food, of which, in consequence
of the improvement of land, many people have the disposal beyond what they
themselves can consume, is the great cause of the demand, both for the
precious metals and the precious stones, as well as for every other
conveniency and ornament of dress, lodging, household furniture, and
equipage. Food not only constitutes the principal part of the riches of the
world, but it is the abundance of food which gives the principal part of
their value to many other sorts of riches. The poor inhabitants of Cuba and
St. Domingo, when they were first discovered by the Spaniards, used to wear
little bits of gold as ornaments in their hair and other parts of their
dress. They seemed to value them as we would do any little pebbles of
somewhat more than ordinary beauty, and to consider them as just worth the
picking up, but not worth the refusing to any body who asked them, They gave
them to their new guests at the first request, without seeming to think that
they had made them any very valuable present. They were astonished to
observe the rage of the Spaniards to obtain them; and had no notion that
there could anywhere be a country in which many people had the disposal of
so great a superfluity of food; so scanty always among themselves, that, for
a very small quantity of those glittering baubles, they would willingly give
as much as might maintain a whole family for many years. Could they have
been made to understand this, the passion of the Spaniards would not have
surprised them.
PART III. Of the variations in the Proportion between the respective
Values of that sort of Produce which always affords Rent, and of that which
sometimes does, and sometimes does not, afford Rent.
The increasing abundance of food, in consequence of the increasing
improvement and cultivation, must necessarily increase the demand for every
part of the produce of land which is not food, and which can be applied
either to use or to ornament. In the whole progress of improvement, it
might, therefore, be expected there should be only one variation in the
comparative values of those two different sorts of produce. The value of
that sort which sometimes does, and sometimes does not afford rent, should
constantly rise in proportion to that which always affords some rent. As art
and industry advance, the materials of clothing and lodging, the useful
fossils and materials of the earth, the precious metals and the precious
stones, should gradually come to be more and more in demand, should
gradually exchange for a greater and a greater quantity of food ; or, in
other words, should gradually become dearer and dearer. This, accordingly,
has been the case with most of these things upon most occasions, and would
have been the case with all of them upon all occasions, if particular
accidents had not, upon some occasions, increased the supply of some of them
in a still greater proportion than the demand.
The value of a free-stone quarry, for example, will necessarily increase
with the increasing improvement and population of the country round about
it, especially if it should be the only one in the neighbourhood. But the
value of a silver mine, even though there should not be another within a
thousand miles of it, will not necessarily increase with the improvement of
the country in which it is situated. The market for the produce of a
free-stone quarry can seldom extend more than a few miles round about it,
and the demand must generally be in proportion to the improvement and
population of that small district ; but the market for the produce of a silver
mine may extend over the whole known world. Unless the world in general.
therefore, be advancing in improvement and population, the demand for silver
might not be at all increased by the improvement even of a large country in
the neighbourhood of the mine. Even though the world in general were
improving, yet if, in the course of its improvements, new mines should be
discovered, much more fertile than any which had been known before, though
the demand for silver would necessarily increase, yet the supply might
increase in so much a greater proportion, that the real price of that metal
might gradually fall; that is, any given quantity, a pound weight of it, for
example, might gradually purchase or command a smaller and a smaller
quantity of labour, or exchange for a smaller and a smaller quantity of
corn, the principal part of the subsistence of the labourer.
The great market for silver is the commercial and civilized part of the
world.
If, by the general progress of improvement, the demand of this market should
increase, while, at the same time, the supply did not increase in the same
proportion, the value of silver would gradually rise in proportion to that
of corn. Any given quantity of silver would exchange for a greater and a
greater quantity of corn ; or, in other words, the average money price of
corn would gradually become cheaper and cheaper.
If, on the contrary, the supply, by some accident, should increase, for many
years together, in a greater proportion than the demand, that metal would
gradually become cheaper and cheaper; or, in other words, the average money
price of corn would, in spite of all improvements, gradually become dearer
and dearer.
But if, on the other hand, the supply of that metal should increase nearly
in the same proportion as the demand, it would continue to purchase or
exchange for nearly the same quantity of corn ; and the average money price
of corn would, in spite of all improvements. continue very nearly the same.
These three seem to exhaust all the possible combinations of events which
can happen in the progress of improvement; and during the course of the four
centuries preceding the present, if we may judge by what has happened both
in France and Great Britain, each of those three different combinations
seems to have taken place in the European market, and nearly in the same
order, too, in which I have here set them down.
Digression concerning the Variations in the value of Silver during the
Course of the Four last Centuries.
First Period. In 1350, and for some time before, the average price of the
quarter of wheat in England seems not to have been estimated lower than four
ounces of silver, Tower weight, equal to about twenty shillings of our
present money. From this price it seems to have fallen gradually to two
ounces of silver, equal to about ten shillings of our present money, the
price at which we find it estimated in the beginning of the sixteenth
century, and at which it seems to have continued to be estimated till about
1570.
In 1350, being the 25th of Edward III. was enacted what is called the
Statute of Labourers. In the preamble, it complains much of the insolence of
servants, who endeavoured to raise their wages upon their masters. It
therefore ordains, that all servants and labourers should, for the future,
be contented with the same wages and liveries (liveries in those times
signified not only clothes, but provisions) which they had been accustomed
to receive in the 20th year of the king, and the four preceding years; that,
upon this account, their livery-wheat should nowhere be estimated higher
than tenpence a-bushel, and that it should always be in the option of the
master to deliver them either the wheat or the money. Tenpence: a-bushel,
therefore, had, in the 25th of Edward III. been reckoned a very moderate
price of wheat, since it required a particular statute to oblige servants to
accept of it in exchange for their usual livery of provisions ; and it had
been reckoned a reasonable price ten years before that, or in the 16th year
of the king, the term to which the statute refers. But in the 16th year of
Edward III. tenpence contained about half an ounce of silver, Tower weight,
and was nearly equal to half-a-crown of our present money. Four ounces of
silver, Tower weight, therefore, equal to six shillings and eightpence of
the money of those times, and to near twenty shillings of that of the
present, must have been reckoned a moderate price for the quarter of eight
bushels.
This statute is surely a better evidence of what was reckoned, in those
times, a moderate price of grain, than the prices of some particular years,
which have generally been recorded by historians and other writers, on
account of their extraordinary dearness or cheapness, and from which,
therefore, it is difficult to form any judgment concerning what may have
been the ordinary price. There are, besides, other reasons for believing
that, in the beginning of the fourteenth century, and for some time before,
the common price of wheat was not less than four ounces of silver the
quarter, and that of other grain in proportion.
In 1309, Ralph de Born, prior of St Augustine's, Canterbury, gave a feast
upon his installation-day, of which William Thorn has preserved, not only
the bill of fare, but the prices of many particulars. In that feast were
consumed, 1st, fifty-three quarters of wheat, which cost nineteen pounds,
or seven shillings, and twopence a-quarter, equal to about one-and-twenty
shillings and sixpence of our present money ; 2dly, fifty-eight quarters of
malt, which cost seventeen pounds ten shillings, or six shillings a-quarter,
equal to about eighteen shillings of our present money; 3dly, twenty
quarters of oats, which cost four pounds, or four shillings a-quarter, equal
to about twelve shillings of our present money. The prices of malt and oats
seem here to lie higher than their ordinary proportion to the price of
wheat.
These prices are not recorded, on account of their extraordinary dearness or
cheapness, but are mentioned accidentally, as the prices actually paid for
large quantities of grain consumed at a feast, which was famous for its
magnificence.
In 1262, being the 51st of Henry III. was revived an ancient statute, called
the assize of bread and ale, which, the king says in the preamble, had been
made in the times of his progenitors, some time kings of England. It is
probably, therefore, as old at least as the time of his grandfather, Henry
II. and may have been as old as the Conquest. It regulates the price of
bread according as the prices of wheat may happen to be, from one shilling
to twenty shillings the quarter of the money of those times. But statutes of
this kind are generally presumed to provide with equal care for all
deviations from the middle price, for those below it, as well as for those
above it. Ten shillings, therefore, containing six ounces of silver, Tower
weight, and equal to about thirty shillings of our present money, must, upon
this supposition, have been reckoned the middle price of the quarter of
wheat when this statute was first enacted, and must have continued to be so
in the 51st of Henry III. We cannot, therefore, be very wrong in supposing
that the middle price was not less than one-third of the highest price at
which this statute regulates the price of bread, or than six shillings and
eightpence of the money of those times, containing four ounces of silver,
Tower weight.
From these different facts, therefore, we seem to have some reason to
conclude that, about the middle of the fourteenth century, and for a
considerable time before, the average or ordinary price of the quarter of
wheat was not supposed to be less than four ounces of silver, Tower weight.
From about the middle of the fourteenth to the beginning of the sixteenth
century, what was reckoned the reasonable and moderate, that is, the
ordinary or average price of wheat, seems to have sunk gradually to about
one half of this price; so as at last to have fallen to about two ounces of
silver, Tower weight, equal to about ten shillings of our present money. It
continued to be estimated at this price till about 1570.
In the household book of Henry, the fifth earl of Northumberland, drawn up
in 1512 there are two different estimations of wheat. In one of them it is
computed at six shilling and eightpence the quarter, in the other at five
shillings and eightpence only. In 1512, six shillings and eightpence
contained only two ounces of silver, Tower weight, and were equal to about
ten shillings of our present money.
From the 25th of Edward III. to the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth,
during the space of more than two hundred years, six shillings and
eightpence, it appears from several different statutes, had continued to be
considered as what is called the moderate and reasonable, that is, the
ordinary or average price of wheat. The quantity of silver, however,
contained in that nominal sum was, during the course of this period,
continually diminishing in consequence of some alterations which were made
in the coin. But the increase of the value of silver had, it seems, so far
compensated the diminution of the quantity of it contained in the same
nominal sum, that the legislature did not think it worth while to attend to
this circumstance.
Thus, in 1436, it was enacted, that wheat might be exported without a
licence when the price was so low as six shillings and eightpence: and in
1463, it was enacted, that no wheat should be imported if the price was not
above six shillings and eightpence the quarter: The legislature had
imagined, that when the price was so low, there could be no inconveniency in
exportation, but that when it rose higher, it became prudent to allow of
importation. Six shillings and eightpence, therefore, containing about the
same quantity of silver as thirteen shillings and fourpence of our present
money (one-third part less than the same nominal sum contained in the time
of Edward III), had, in those times, been considered as what is called the
moderate and reasonable price of wheat.
In 1554, by the 1st and 2nd of Philip and Mary, and in 1558, by the 1st of
Elizabeth, the exportation of wheat was in the same manner prohibited,
whenever the price of the quarter should exceed six shillings and
eightpence, which did not then contain two penny worth more silver than the
same nominal sum does at present. But it had soon been found, that to
restrain the exportation of wheat till the price was so very low, was, in
reality, to prohibit it altogether. In 1562, therefore, by the 5th of
Elizabeth, the exportation of wheat was allowed from certain ports, whenever
the price of the quarter should not exceed ten shillings, containing nearly
the same quantity of silver as the like nominal sum does at present. This
price had at this time, therefore, been considered as what is called the
moderate and reasonable price of wheat. It agrees nearly with the estimation
of the Northumberland book in 1512.
That in France the average price of grain was, in the same manner, much
lower in the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century,
than in the two centuries preceding, has been observed both by Mr Dupré de
St Maur, and by the elegant author of the Essay on the Policy of Grain. Its
price, during the same period, had probably sunk in the same manner through
the greater part of Europe.
This rise in the value of silver, in proportion to that of corn, may either
have been owing altogether to the increase of the demand for that metal, in
consequence of increasing improvement and cultivation, the supply, in
the mean time, continuing the same as before; or, the demand continuing the
same as before, it may have been owing altogether to the gradual diminution
of the supply: the greater part of the mines which were then known in the
world being much exhausted, and, consequently, the expense of working them
much increased; or it may have been owing partly to the one, and partly to
the other of those two circumstances. In the end of the fifteenth and
beginning of the sixteenth centuries, the greater part of Europe was
approaching towards a more settled from of government than it had enjoyed
for several ages before. The increase of security would naturally increase
industry and improvement; and the demand for the precious metals, as well as
for every other luxury and ornament, would naturally increase with the
increase of riches. A greater annual produce would require a greater
quantity of coin to circulate it ; and a greater number of rich people would
require a greater quantity of plate and other ornaments of silver. It is
natural to suppose, too, that the greater part of the mines which then
supplied the European market with silver might be a good deal exhausted, and
have become more expensive in the working. They had been wrought, many of
them, from the time of the Romans.
It has been the opinion, however, of the greater part of those who have
written upon the prices of commodities in ancient times, that, from the
Conquest, perhaps from the invasion of Julius Caesar, till the discovery of
the mines of America, the value of silver was continually diminishing. This
opinion they seem to have been led into, partly by the observations which
they had occasion to make upon the prices both of corn and of some other
parts of the rude produce of land, and partly by the popular notion, that as
the quantity of silver naturally increases in every country with the
increase of wealth, so its value diminishes as it quantity increases.
In their observations upon the prices of corn, three different circumstances
seem frequently to have misled them.
First. in ancient times, almost all rents were paid in kind; in a certain
quantity of corn, cattle, poultry, etc. It sometimes happened, however, that
the landlord would stipulate, that he should be at liberty to demand of the
tenant, either the annual payment in kind or a certain sum of money instead
of it. The price at which the payment in kind was in this manner exchanged
for a certain sum of money, is in Scotland called the conversion price. As
the option is always in the landlord to take either the substance or the
price, it is necessary, for the safety of the tenant, that the conversion
price should rather be below than above the average market price. In many
places, accordingly, it is not much above one half of this price. Through
the greater part of Scotland this custom still continues with regard to
poultry, and in some places with regard to cattle. It might probably have
continued to take place, too, with regard to corn, had not the institution
of the public fiars put an end to it. These are annual valuations, according
to the judgment of an assize, of the average price of all the different
sorts of grain, and of all the different qualities of each, according to the
actual market price in every different county. This institution rendered it
sufficiently safe for the tenant, and much more convenient for the landlord,
to convert, as they call it, the corn rent, rather at what should happen to
be the price of the fiars of each year, than at any certain fixed price. But
the writers who have collected the prices of corn in ancient times seem
frequently to have mistaken what is called in Scotland the conversion price
for the actual market price. Fleetwood acknowledges, upon one occasion, that
he had made this mistake. As he wrote his book, however, for a particular
purpose, he does not think proper to make this acknowledgment till after
transcribing this conversion price fifteen times. The price is eight
shillings the quarter of wheat. This sum in 1423, the year at which he
begins with it, contained the same quantity of silver as sixteen shillings
of our present money. But in 1562, the year at which he ends with it, it
contained no more than the same nominal sum does at present.
Secondly, they have been misled by the slovenly manner in which some ancient
statutes of assize had been sometimes transcribed by lazy copiers, and
sometimes, perhaps, actually composed by the legislature.
The ancient statutes of assize seem to have begun always with determining
what ought to be the price of bread and ale when the price of wheat and
barley were at the lowest ; and to have proceeded gradually to determine
what it ought to be, according as the prices of those two sorts of grain
should gradually rise above this lowest price. But the transcribers of those
statutes seem frequently to have thought it sufficient to copy the
regulation as far as the three or four first and lowest prices ; saving in
this manner their own labour, and judging, I suppose, that this was enough
to show what proportion ought to be observed in all higher prices.
Thus, in the assize of bread and ale, of the 51st of Henry III. the price of
bread was regulated according to the different prices of wheat, from one
shilling to twenty shillings the quarter of the money of those times. But in
the manuscripts from which all the different editions of the statutes,
preceding that of Mr Ruffhead, were printed, the copiers had never
transcribed this regulation beyond the price of twelve shillings. Several
writers, therefore, being misled by this faulty transcription, very
naturally conclude that the middle price, or six shillings the quarter,
equal to about eighteen shillings of our present money, was the ordinary or
average price of wheat at that time.
In the statute of Tumbrel and Pillory, enacted nearly about the same time,
the price of ale is regulated according to every sixpence rise in the price
of barley, from two shillings, to four shillings the quarter. That four
shillings, however, was not considered as the highest price to which barley
might frequently rise in those times, and that these prices were only given
as an example of the proportion which ought to be observed in all other
prices, whether higher or lower, we may infer from the last words of the
statute: " Et sic deinceps crescetur vel diminuetur per sex denarios." The
expression is very slovenly, but the meaning is plain enough, " that the
price of ale is in this manner to be increased or diminished according to
every sixpence rise or fall in the price of barley." In the composition of
this statute, the legislature itself seems to have been as negligent as the
copiers were in the transcription of the other.
In an ancient manuscript of the Regiam Majestatem, an old Scotch law book,
there is a statute of assize, in which the price of bread is regulated
according to all the different prices of wheat, from tenpence to three
shillings the Scotch boll, equal to about half an English quarter. Three
shillings Scotch, at the time when this assize is supposed to have been
enacted, were equal to about nine shillings sterling of our present money Mr
Ruddiman seems {See his Preface to Anderson's Diplomata Scotiae.} to
conclude from this, that three shillings was the highest price to which
wheat ever rose in those times, and that tenpence, a shilling, or at most
two shillings, were the ordinary prices. Upon consulting the manuscript,
however, it appears evidently, that all these prices are only set down as
examples of the proportion which ought to be observed between the respective
prices of wheat and bread. The last words of the statute are " reliqua
judicabis secundum praescripta, habendo respectum ad pretium bladi." " You
shall judge of the remaining cases, according to what is above written,
having respect to the price of corn."
Thirdly, they seem to have been misled too, by the very low price at which
wheat was sometimes sold in very ancient times ; and to have imagined, that
as its lowest price was then much lower than in later times its ordinary
price must likewise have been much lower. They might have found, however,
that in those ancient times its highest price was fully as much above, as
its lowest price was below any thing that had ever been known in later
times. Thus, in 1270, Fleetwood gives us two prices of the quarter of wheat.
The one is four pounds sixteen shillings of the money of those times, equal
to fourteen pounds eight shillings of that of the present; the other is six
pounds eight shillings, equal to nineteen pounds four shillings of our
present money. No price can be found in the end of the fifteenth, or
beginning of the sixteenth century, which approaches to the extravagance of
these. The price of corn, though at all times liable to variation varies
most in those turbulent and disorderly societies, in which the interruption
of all commerce and communication hinders the plenty of one part of the
country from relieving the scarcity of another. In the disorderly state of
England under the Plantagenets, who governed it from about the middle of the
twelfth till towards the end of the fifteenth century, one district might be
in plenty, while another, at no great distance, by having its crop
destroyed, either by some accident of the seasons, or by the incursion of
some neighbouring baron, might be suffering all the horrors of a famine; and
yet if the lands of some hostile lord were interposed between them, the one
might not be able to give the least assistance to the other. Under the
vigorous administration of the Tudors, who governed England during the
latter part of the fifteenth, and through the whole of the sixteenth
century, no baron was powerful enough to dare to disturb the public
security.
The reader will find at the end of this chapter all the prices of wheat
which have been collected by Fleetwood, from l202 to 1597, both inclusive,
reduced to the money of the present times, and digested, according to the
order of time, into seven divisions of twelve years each. At the end of each
division, too, he will find the average price of the twelve years of which
it consists. In that long period of time, Fleetwood has been able to collect
the prices of no more than eighty years ; so that four years are wanting to
make out the last twelve years. I have added, therefore, from the accounts
of Eton college, the prices of 1598, 1599, 1600, and 1601. It is the only
addition which I have made. The reader will see, that from the beginning of
the thirteenth till after the middle of the sixteenth century, the average
price of each twelve years grows gradually lower and lower; and that towards
the end of the sixteenth century it begins to rise again. The prices,
indeed, which Fleetwood has been able to collect, seem to have been those
chiefly which were remarkable for extraordinary dearness or cheapness ; and
I do not pretend that any very certain conclusion can be drawn from them. So
far, however, as they prove any thing at all, they confirm the account which
I have been endeavouring to give. Fleetwood himself, however, seems, with
most other writers, to have believed, that, during all this period, the
value of silver, in consequence of its increasing abundance, was continually
diminishing. The prices of corn, which he himself has collected, certainly
do not agree with this opinion. They agree perfectly with that of Mr Dupré
de St Maur, and with that which I have been endeavouring to explain. Bishop
Fleetwood and Mr Dupré de St Maur are the two authors who seem to have
collected, with the greatest diligence and fidelity, the prices of things in
ancient times. It is some what curious that, though their opinions are so
very different, their facts, so far as they relate to the price of corn at
least, should coincide so very exactly.
It is not, however, so much from the low price of corn, as from that of some
other parts of the rude produce of land, that the most judicious writers
have inferred the great value of silver in those very ancient times. Corn,
it has been said, being a sort of manufacture, was, in those rude ages, much
dearer in proportion than the greater part of other commodities; it is
meant, I suppose, than the greater part of unmanufactured commodities, such
as cattle, poultry, game of all kinds, etc. That in those times of poverty
and barbarism these were proportionably much cheaper than corn, is
undoubtedly true. But this cheapness was not the effect of the high value of
silver, but of the low value of those commodities. It was not because silver
would in such times purchase or represent a greater quantity of labour, but
because such commodities would purchase or represent a much smaller quantity
than in times of more opulence and improvement. Silver must certainly be
cheaper in Spanish America than in Europe ; in the country where it is
produced, than in the country to which it is brought, at the expense of a
long carriage both by land and by sea, of a freight, and an insurance.
One-and-twenty pence halfpenny sterling, however, we are told by Ulloa, was,
not many years ago, at Buenos Ayres, the price of an ox chosen from a herd
of three or four hundred. Sixteen shillings sterling, we are told by Mr
Byron, was the price of a good horse in the capital of Chili. In a country
naturally fertile, but of which the far greater part is altogether
uncultivated, cattle, poultry, game of all kinds, etc. as they can be
acquired with a very small quantity of labour, so they will purchase or
command but a very small quantity. The low money price for which they may be
sold, is no proof that the real value of silver is there very high, but that
the real value of those commodities is very low.
Labour, it must always be remembered, and not any particular commodity, or
set of commodities, is the real measure of the value both of silver and of
all other commodities.
But in countries almost waste, or but thinly inhabited, cattle, poultry,
game of all kinds, etc. as they are the spontaneous productions of Nature,
so she frequently produces them in much greater quantities than the
consumption of the inhabitants requires. In such a state of things, the
supply commonly exceeds the demand. In different states of society, in
different states of improvement, therefore, such commodities will represent,
or be equivalent, to very different quantities of labour.
In every state of society, in every stage of improvement, corn is the
production of human industry. But the average produce of every sort of
industry is always suited, more or less exactly, to the average consumption;
the average supply to the average demand. In every different stage of
improvement, besides, the raising of equal quantities of corn in the same
soil and climate, will, at an average, require nearly equal quantities of
labour; or, what comes to the same thing, the price of nearly equal
quantities; the continual increase of the productive powers of labour, in an
improved state of cultivation, being more or less counterbalanced by the
continual increasing price of cattle, the principal instruments of
agriculture. Upon all these accounts, therefore, we may rest assured, that
equal quantities of corn will, in every state of society, in every stage of
improvement, more nearly represent, or be equivalent to, equal quantities of
labour, than equal quantities of any other part of the rude produce of land.
Corn, accordingly, it has already been observed, is, in all the different
stages of wealth and improvement, a more accurate measure of value than any
other commodity or set of commodities. In all those different stages,
therefore, we can judge better of the real value of silver, by comparing it
with corn, than by comparing it with any other commodity or set of
commodities.
Corn, besides, or whatever else is the common and favourite vegetable food
of the people, constitutes, in every civilized country, the principal part
of the subsistence of the labourer. In consequence of the extension of
agriculture, the land of every country produces a much greater quantity of
vegetable than of animal food, and the labourer everywhere lives chiefly
upon the wholesome food that is cheapest and most abundant. Butcher's meat,
except in the most thriving countries, or where labour is most highly
rewarded, makes but an insignificant part of his subsistence; poultry makes
a still smaller part of it, and game no part of it. In France, and even in
Scotland, where labour is somewhat better rewarded than in France, the
labouring poor seldom eat butcher's meat, except upon holidays, and other
extraordinary occasions. The money price of labour, therefore, depends much
more upon the average money price of corn, the subsistence of the labourer,
than upon that of butcher's meat, or of any other part of the rude produce
of land. The real value of gold and silver, therefore, the real quantity of
labour which they can purchase or command, depends much more upon the
quantity of corn which they can purchase or command, than upon that of
butcher's meat, or any other part of the rude produce of land.
Such slight observations, however, upon the prices either of corn or of
other commodities, would not probably have misled so many intelligent
authors, had they not been influenced at the same time by the popular
notion, that as the quantity of silver naturally increases in every country
with the increase of wealth, so its value diminishes as its quantity
increases. This notion, however, seems to be altogether groundless.
The quantity of the precious metals may increase in any country from two
different causes ; either, first, from the increased abundance of the mines
which supply it; or, secondly, from the increased wealth of the people, from
the increased produce of their annual labour. The first of these causes is
no doubt necessarily connected with the diminution of the value of the
precious metals; but the second is not.
When more abundant mines are discovered, a greater quantity of the precious
metals is brought to market; and the quantity of the necessaries and
conveniencies of life for which they must he exchanged being the same as
before, equal quantities of the metals must be exchanged for smaller
quantities of commodities. So far, therefore, as the increase of the
quantity of the precious metals in any country arises from the increased
abundance of the mines, it is necessarily connected with some diminution of
their value.
When, on the contrary, the wealth of any country increases, when the annual
produce of its labour becomes gradually greater and greater, a greater
quantity of coin becomes necessary in order to circulate a greater quantity
of commodities: and the people, as they can afford it, as they have more
commodities to give for it, will naturally purchase a greater and a greater
quantity of plate. The quantity of their coin will increase from necessity;
the quantity of their plate from vanity and ostentation, or from the same
reason that the quantity of fine statues, pictures, and of every other
luxury and curiosity, is likely to increase among them. But as statuaries
and painters are not likely to be worse rewarded in times of wealth and
prosperity, than in times of poverty and depression, so gold and silver are
not likely to be worse paid for.
The price of gold and silver, when the accidental discovery of more abundant
mines does not keep it down, as it naturally rises with the wealth of every
country; so, whatever be the state of the mines, it is at all times
naturally higher in a rich than in a poor country. Gold and silver, like all
other commodities, naturally seek the market where the best price is given
for them, and the best price is commonly given for every thing in the
country which can best afford it. Labour, it must be remembered, is the
ultimate price which is paid for every thing; and in countries where labour
is equally well rewarded, the money price of labour will be in proportion to
that of the subsistence of the labourer. But gold and silver will naturally
exchange for a greater quantity of subsistence in a rich than in a poor
country ; in a country which abounds with subsistence, than in one which is
but indifferently supplied with it. If the two countries are at a great
distance, the difference may be very great; because, though the metals
naturally fly from the worse to the better market, yet it may be difficult
to transport them in such quantities as to bring their price nearly to a
level in both. If the countries are near, the difference will be smaller,
and may sometimes be scarce perceptible ; because in this case the
transportation will be easy. China is a much richer country than any part of
Europe, and the difference between the price of subsistence in China and in
Europe is very great. Rice in China is much cheaper than wheat is any where
in Europe. England is a much richer country than Scotland, but the
difference between the money price of corn in those two countries is much
smaller, and is but just perceptible. In proportion to the quantity or
measure, Scotch corn generally appears to be a good deal cheaper than
English; but, in proportion to its quality, it is certainly somewhat dearer.
Scotland receives almost every year very large supplies from England, and
every commodity must commonly be somewhat dearer in the country to which it
is brought than in that from which it comes. English corn, therefore, must
be dearer in Scotland than in England ; and yet in proportion to its
quality, or to the quantity and goodness of the flour or meal which can be
made from it, it cannot commonly be sold higher there than the Scotch corn
which comes to market in competition with it.
The difference between the money price of labour in China and in Europe, is
still greater than that between the money price of subsistence; because the
real recompence of labour is higher in Europe than in China, the greater
part of Europe being in an improving state, while China seems to be standing
still. The money price of labour is lower in Scotland than in England,
because the real recompence of labour is much lower: Scotland, though
advancing to greater wealth, advances much more slowly than England. The
frequency of emigration from Scotland, and the rarity of it from England,
sufficiently prove that the demand for labour is very different in the two
countries. The proportion between the real recompence of labour in different
countries, it must be remembered, is naturally regulated, not by their
actual wealth or poverty, but by their advancing, stationary, or declining
condition.
Gold and silver, as they are naturally of the greatest value among the
richest, so they are naturally of the least value among the poorest nations.
Among savages, the poorest of all nations, they are scarce of any value.
In great towns, corn is always dearer than in remote parts of the country.
This, however, is the effect, not of the real cheapness of silver, but of
the real dearness of corn. It does not cost less labour to bring silver to
the great town than to the remote parts of the country; but it costs a great
deal more to bring corn.
In some very rich and commercial countries, such as Holland and the
territory of Genoa, corn is dear for the same reason that it is dear in
great towns. They do not produce enough to maintain their inhabitants. They
are rich in the industry and skill of their artificers and manufacturers, in
every sort of machinery which can facilitate and abridge labour; in
shipping, and in all the other instruments and means of carriage and
commerce: but they are poor in corn, which, as it must be brought to them
from distant countries, must, by an addition to its price, pay for the
carriage from those countries. It does not cost less labour to bring silver
to Amsterdam than to Dantzic ; but it costs a great deal more to bring corn.
The real cost of silver must be nearly the same in both places ; but that of
corn must be very different. Diminish the real opulence either of Holland or
of the territory of Genoa, while the number of their inhabitants remains the
same ; diminish their power of supplying themselves from distant countries;
and the price of corn, instead of sinking with that diminution in the
quantity of their silver, which must necessarily accompany this declension,
either as its cause or as its effect, will rise to the price of a famine.
When we are in want of necessaries, we must part with all superfluities, of
which the value, as it rises in times of opulence and prosperity, so it
sinks in times of poverty and distress. It is otherwise with necessaries.
Their real price, the quantity of labour which they can purchase or command,
rises in times of poverty and distress, and sinks in times of opulence and
prosperity, which are always times of great abundance ; for they could not
otherwise be times of opulence and prosperity.Corn is a necessary, silver is
only a superfluity.
Whatever, therefore, may have been the increase in the quantity of the
precious metals, which, during the period between the middle of the
fourteenth and that of the sixteenth century, arose from the increase of
wealth and improvement, it could have no tendency to diminish their value,
either in Great Britain, or in my other part of Europe. If those who have
collected the prices of things in ancient times, therefore, had, during this
period, no reason to infer the diminution of the value of silver from any
observations which they had made upon the prices either of corn, or of
other commodities, they had still less reason to infer it from any supposed
increase of wealth and improvement.
Second Period. But how various soever may have been the opinions of the
learned concerning the progress of the value of silver during the first
period, they are unanimous concerning it during the second.
From about 1570 to about 1640, during a period of about seventy years, the
variation in the proportion between the value of silver and that of corn
held a quite opposite course. Silver sunk in its real value, or would
exchange for a smaller quantity of labour than before; and corn rose in its
nominal price, and, instead of being commonly sold for about two ounces of
silver the quarter, or about ten shillings of our present money, came to be
sold for six and eight ounces of silver the quarter, or about thirty and
forty shillings of our present money.
The discovery of the abundant mines of America seems to have been the sole
cause of this diminution in the value of silver, in proportion to that of
corn. It is accounted for, accordingly, in the same manner by every body ;
and there never has been any dispute, either about the fact, or about the
cause of it. The greater part of Europe was, during this period, advancing
in industry and improvement, and the demand for silver must consequently
have been increasing; but the increase of the supply had, it seems, so far
exceeded that of the demand, that the value of that metal sunk considerably.
The discovery of the mines of America, it is to be observed, does not seem
to have had any very sensible effect upon the prices of things in England
till after 1570; though even the mines of Potosi had been discovered more
than twenty years before.
From 1595 to 1620, both inclusive, the average price of the quarter of nine
bushels of the best wheat, at Windsor market, appears, from the accounts of
Eton college, to have been £ 2:1:6 9/13. From which sum, neglecting the
fraction, and deducting a ninth, or 4s. 7 1/3d., the price of the quarter of
eight bushels comes out to have been £ 1:16:10 2/3. And from this sum,
neglecting likewise the fraction, and deducting a ninth, or 4s. 1 1/9d., for
the difference between the price of the best wheat and that of the middle
wheat, the price of the middle wheat comes out to have been about £ 1:12:8
8/9, or about six ounces and one-third of an ounce of silver.
From 1621 to 1636, both inclusive, the average price of the same measure of
the best wheat, at the same market, appears, from the same accounts, to have
been £ 2:10s.; from which, making the like deductions as in the foregoing
case, the average price of the quarter of eight bushels of middle wheat comes
out to have been £ 1:19:6, or about seven ounces and two-thirds of an ounce
of silver.
Third Period. - Between 1630 and 1640, or about 1636, the effect of the
discovery of the mines of America, in reducing the value of silver, appears
to have been completed, and the value of that metal seems never to have sunk
lower in proportion to that of corn than it was about that time. It seems to
have risen somewhat in the course of the present century, and it had
probably begun to do so, even some time before the end of the last.