736 



E N G L A N D. 



T .\nij-: ii. 







In calculating the? value of agricultural produce by 

 of it, it seems fair, as it exhibits the rack-n ' 

 (though where the lands are let at their full value, the 

 4-afk-rent -ind real rent must correspond, and in some 

 caws, the real rent would be above the fair rent, or 

 Uat rent which would be quintupled in the produce,) 



to consider it as 4.J, instead of .5 times the value of tlir 

 rent. If we go on this supposition, then tlie value 

 of the agricultural produce will be exhibited thus, 

 L.29,503,073 X*.5= L.I 32,763,828; which differs very 

 inconsiderably from the result on this point, which we 

 obtained by the former mde of calcidation. It may, 



