534 Letter on Affairs in general. [ Nov. 
these medicaments inflexibly and in sufficient:doses, Slight/and uncertaim 
punishments. always|,.do mischief instead -of -good—they' anger: |the; — 
offender, without going far enough to alarmshims)|) es of oun es ten) 
The high |Tory publications, some of them \aredn; great) terrot;) to) 
think what is to become of the low ands if the-trade) in‘corn should 
be thrown open;—that is to say, of the: lands low» in«price; osuchias 
are let (now) for: five shillings or ten shillingsanacres:) The short result: 
will be, that these low lands; at five and’ ‘ten shillingsoan acré, willbe! 
placed just where they were thirty years ago—out of corn cultivation, 
They will then be laid down as quick as possible for egistment;” and! 
we shall have meat at a price at which people may afford to eat ites"! 
These complaints, however, about the failure of the «low lands,”:ow 
the part of the landed proprietors are really a little too presumptuous 3 
when we consider that perhaps half the very ‘“ low lands” which they 
are in such doubt now how they shall get rent for, have been added to their 
estates—not by any purchase, but by enclosures,—within the last’ thirty 
years. And this fact forms an additional proof of ‘the ‘principle which’ 
I have before asserted—that, in political arrangements it is impossible’ 
to decide any point upon principle; but that ninety-nine questions in ‘@ 
hundred will be questions of circumstance and of) degree: °''No 
one can doubt that the cultivation of a country, considered” in®the 
abstract, becomes an aid to, as well as an evidence of, its comfort and 
its wealth. And yet nothing is more certain than that this cultivation 
this same improvement,—carried beyond a given point,’ forms’ a very 
heavy curse upon large classes of the community. \The*enclosure of 
common, or waste Jands, was effected upon this principle—to> those 
who already possessed so. much land, it allotted‘so muchmore!! That 
is to say, it gave. new property to those who Aad property$-batit! 
gave nothing to those who had one,—and yet although ‘it gave:nothing; ' 
it.did_ not remain entirely quiescent with respect: to—these for it took 
away the little right and comfort, and: privilege-whether of daw ‘or’ 
sufference—which they enjoyed out of the partitioned property already: 
I know that the commonable rights of parishes were provided °fort’ 
That, in all cases, sufficient ground for the purposés)-of those’ whoo had 
rights of “ turning” were left open. That is toosay, that the rich only 
appropriated to themselves a part of that which was common-toall— 
they did not take the whole. But they took this—even  from'those’ who 
had no commonable rights, as regarded “ turning,” &c.—they took ‘the 
common right which the very poorest labourer’s child: enioyed—the 
practical, if not the claimable, convenience of open country—absence 
of spring-gun—free footing—and sweet airs: Carry: the inclosure 
system on; carry it twice as far as it has) gone; >‘and° what does it 
come to? It adds large tracts of land to ‘the: estates: of those “who 
possess estates already; and leaves to the millions—-who' have ‘no: 
estates—the blessed strip they call the «‘ King’s highway,” ‘to’ walk and® 
take the dust upon. ‘There is not a point through’ the ‘country ‘at 
which the rights of ownership—and. the system of “¢ improvement’2“are’ 
not shutting the population now, out. of » tights, «which; spractieally, 
twenty years since, they had, and enjoyed.\-A peasant ‘can'putohis™ 
foot nowhere now, without trespass. If, he’ walks «into a*wood, thee 
is shot by a spring-gun. If he gathers wild nuts there::‘e ‘is sent’to" 
the tread-mill. He will suffer the same penalty for gathering’sloes‘and: 
blackberries, before ten years more are over.) 1 do not ocomplains of2 
the enforcement of the law in all these cases; because ''rights’ até’ 
IBMT 
