aii Review q/ Peebles Survey. May 



in its infancj, Ihort leafes operate efFe6Lually to keep it in a back- 

 ward rtaie. 



In like manner, the author feems adverfe to compulforj re- 

 ftrictions upon tiie farmer in the management of land, and places 

 the conduct of the Edinburgh agents in a ludicrous light. He 

 fajs, 



* It is not a little ridiculous to fee fuch direftion affiimed by a bufl- 

 nefs man, of the profcflion of the law, very commonly a refident Edin- 

 burgh cit ; and provided, probably, with one univerfal model, like the 

 bed of Procrufles, to which all praftice mull, equally everywhere, b<? 

 adapted : With equal propriety might he, in general, prefume to re- 

 gulate the praclice of manufacture, or of trade, m thofe pioleffionalifts, 

 who rent the honfes belonging to his employer, or who borrow his 

 money at inteveft/ 



Though the common pra61ice jufllfies the obfervation, yet we 

 are free to fay, from our own experience, that the errors of 

 thefe gentlemen proceed more from inattention, than any fixed 

 defign of injuring the tenant. They know no better ; there- 

 fore, unlefs the tenant beflirs himfelf, or gets the conditons of 

 fet fatisfaftorily adjufled before the rent is fixed, the agent 

 muft of couife ad agreeable to the information he poffefles. The 

 fair way, when written propolals are requefted, is to prefent a lill 

 of terms, or what is commonly called the conditions of fet, to the 

 intended offerers, leaving them to fill up the fum of rent them- 

 felves. That this is not agreeable to the common cuftom, we 

 confeis, for the rent is ufually agreed upon in tlie firfl place, and 

 the conditions afterwards ; though it is notorious, that, by arbi- 

 trary reft ri£lions, the value of a farm may for a time be confider- 

 ably lefTened. 



In arranging the fize of farms, the author judicioufly declares 

 againft limitations. 



* "When Laputa projeflors come gravely forward, the one with his 

 fcheme of lOO acre farms, the other with his of 50, and a third with 

 a fort of agrarian cottnge fyllem, it is difficult to determine whether 

 our fpleen or our laughter ought to be moved. So long as they fhall 

 confine themfclves to the pragmatical pointing out of their proper in- 

 terefts to the parties concerned, but who, it ieems, have not lenfe to 

 perceive their own advantage, in fo far they can do no harm, ar.d the 

 parties will judge for thtmfelves. When, however, they would at- 

 tempt to enforce their fpecific vfjlrumt by legiflative authority, their 

 interference is of a more lerious nature than mere pragmatical imper- 

 tinence. 



' The Parliament of Great Britain has not been in tl^.e habit of carr}^- 

 ing meafures by iicclamation : A fi rt of prevalent, philcfophic, native 

 phlrgm, feems unfufceptible of tnihufiaftic admiration of the brilliar^t 



fcheme? 



