to J 
** modity fubjeé to tithes, &e.”? is not, I think, well 
founded; becaufe; the rife and fall of commodities 
is generally occafioned by the plerity or fcarcity of 
them in market. It would not therefore be equitable; 
that the rents of tithes fhould be lowered by parti- 
cular years of great plenty, when the increafed 
quantity makes amends for the decreafed price; and 
it would be equally unjnft, that thofe rents fhould be 
advanced in confequence of high market-ptices, oc-. 
cafioned by years of general failure and fearcity: It 
feems, then, that the rents of tithes could not be 
equitably varied every year, by the market-prices of 
vatious commodities the preceding year; unlefs the 
quantities raifed of thofe commodities could be af- 
certained, ) 
In converting land to its proper ufe, the farmer 
does not fpeculate on the chance of feafons only, but 
on the profpe@ of his commodities finding a ready 
and profitable market. It has been ftated, by. that 
excellent author Dr. Adam SmiTH, imhis celebrated 
inquiry into the nature and caufes of the Wealth of 
Nations, that, “ The quantity of every commodity 
‘which human induftry can either purchafe, or pros 
** duce, naturally regulates itfelf in every country, 
“ according to the effectual demand.” If the effec, 
tual demand be not forefeen, an effeftual fupply 
cannot be expected; and it would fcarcely be equi- 
table, that the rents of tithes fhould be regulated by 
uncertain commodities, which the landholder does 
not 
