354 Review of Dr Gzr diner* s Ef ays* Aug. 



The third fe£lion is on the progrefllve improvement of agricultiirev 

 and means of its increafe to anfwer the rifmg demands of the public. 

 At the outfet, Dr Gardiner falls into an error, at leaft his opinion, if 

 acl-"d upon, would effeftually retard improvement. He afferta, in fub- 

 ftance, that it is the duty of Parliament to keep the prices of provi- 

 fiois lovr, in order that the wages of labour may be regulated in a 

 fimilar manner. Now, it occurs to us, and we have long practically 

 experienced the truth of it, tl'.at the value of labour is feldoni if ever 

 afcertained by the price of provifions, but that the market value of 

 the article is, almofl in ever)' cafe, regp.lated by the demand for the 

 particular fort of lar,our that is wanted. People who write upon the price 

 of provifions, fliculd reflcft that the value of money is now totally 

 altered, and tliat a {hilling for a peck of meal is a very different 

 thing to the fanr.er frcm what it wa?. in foni^er time';. His rent is 

 augmented ; the value of the labour he employs is, in evei"}' cafe, dcuiv 

 led ; and public burdens, formerly almofl unknown to him, are now 

 of confiderable magnitude. Befides, fuch fhoiild confidcr that high and 

 lew prices are onl)' comparative, and that eighteen pence for a peck of 

 meal is in reality a lower price at this time to the confumer than a fliil- 

 ling was twenty years ago, his relative abilities to pay the price being 

 duly attended to. Why fliould it be thought that low prices tend to 

 promote national pr(^.fperity ? If provifions are producv:d at an in- 

 creafcd expence, the manufci6lurer of them is eiititled to an increafe 

 of price, other.wife he would be ruined by the trade in which he is 

 concerned. The fubjf 6l will not bear an argunicnt. Indeed, in a 

 fubfequent feftion, p. 448. Dr Gardiner admit?, that * it is a fpeci- 

 ous, but falfe argument, that the price of labour i?, in mosl^ caC:?; 

 proportioned to the price of provifions ; for in fome difiri6\s, * fays be, 

 * the price of labour is fcarcely fuITic^ent tor the maintenance of a fa- 

 mily ; whilfi: in fome of the manufafturing towns it is too high, to be 

 confident with the profperity of our trade, ' After tliis admifflon, we 

 preiume it would be fuperfluous to fay one woid more upon the 

 fubjec^. 



We are much of Dr Gardiner's opinion concerning the deficien- 

 <^y of Britifli grain, and have more than cncc declared it to be ex- 

 pedient and neceffary to increafe the quantity of cultivated land. 

 This, as he very fuftly obferves (p. 412.), can only be accomplifhed 

 by the divifion of commons and the culture of wafte lands, which, in 

 their prefent ftate, are undoubtedly very unprodu(5live. Perhaps, with 

 the condition of t^iefe lands, no.w ftyled common and wafte, Dr Gar- 

 diner may in fonH: meafure be unacquainted. Many of them are na- 

 turally of good quality ; and, like old maidens, are only fterile, be- 

 caufe they have not been cultivated. We have feen commons in Eng- 

 land carr\'ing nothing but gorfe and thiilles, which were of fiperior 

 natural value to moft of our Scotith infield ; and yet, from individual 

 "negligence, or, what is worfe, from Jegiilative ignorance, they re- 

 rnained in a ftate difgraccful to the nation, and comparatively (»f little 

 ■ ali^c to the proprietors and occupi-rs. So long as feparatc lulls are 



rjeccITaiy, 



