32 On the ORIGIN and STRUCTURE of 



him when he requires them. And, on this ground, and on 

 the power thence conferred, and on the gradual furrender thus 

 occafioned, of the eftates of fmall proprietors, in confideration 

 of protection, he explains the rife of a feudal relation in many 

 diftant countries, and that right of property and inheritance 

 over their dominions, which travellers have afcribed to feveral 

 kings in Africa and the eaft *, as Benin, Congo, &V. 



I HAVE not, however, been able to difcover any example of 

 the retainers of the chief of a rude tribe holding lands from 

 him in this manner. The lots of the Romao clients were as 

 much their own as the larger eftates of their patrons were theirs. 

 The Italian equites received a war-horfe and a ring, which may 

 probably, at firft, have been marks of royal favour, but we do 

 not hear of ufufrucluary eftates being allotted for them. Be- 

 fides, we may be very certain, that, long after farms are fepa- 

 rately cultivated, land is in great abundance, and to be got for 

 the occupying. To prefent, therefore, in fuch times, a retain- 

 er with uncultivated land would be no favour j and as to lands 



which 



* IN the quarto edition, Mr MILLAR ftated this dodlrine more ftrongly. He there lays 

 it down, that the chief, in conlequence of his ancient prerogative of prefiding over the 

 joint labours of the community, will, at the leparation of farms, impofe fuch conditions 

 and limitations on the mares of individuals, as render them dependent on him for the 

 continuance of their pofleflion : And that, in this way, and by the extent of his peculiar 

 domains, his authority becomes almoft unlimited. It is evident, that, if this opinion were 

 well founded, the government of all fmall and rude communities of hufbandmen would 

 be defpotic, which is certainly not the cafe. And, accordingly, the argument on 

 which it refts, though ingenious, admits of being obviated. The chief arranges the 

 annual farms of rude tribes, and poffibly, too, may prefide over the labour of the 

 tribe, if employed on a common farm ; but, as may be reafbnably conjectured from the 

 independent fpirit of uncultivated men, and, as is proved by the fales of lands by the 

 American tribes, the chief is not, on that account, reckoned the proprietor of their ter- 

 ritory. That, like the fpontaneous produce of it, is accounted the common right of the 

 whole freemen. And afterwards, when the annual farm becomes perpetual, or portions 

 of land are feized upon by individuals, land is ftill in fuch vaft abundance, that the fpots, 

 thus occupied, are naturally confidered as the right of the poffeflbr, as abfolutely as the 

 crop which he formerly reaped from his annual farm, or the prey which he feized in the 

 iports of the field. Accordingly, we do not find, that, in any of the original monarchies 

 of Greece, Italy and Gaul, the kings were ever confidered as the proprietors of their do- 

 minions. 



