66 



HISTORY OF AGRICULTURE. 



Part I. 



but, at present, they have done nothing for the improvement of agriculture. The 

 national property is not in sufficient estimation in public opinion to have attracted the 

 manufacturing capital necessary to call forth its real value. This is every where per- 

 ceptible in France : it is neglected, the buildings are badly kept up, the enclosures 

 broken down, the young trees in the orchards destroyed, the dressed vines in ruins. We 

 see, every where, the purchasers too much in haste to take possession, the natural con- 

 sequence of the circumstances in which they were placed ; in short, it appears incon- 

 testable, that within the last twenty years the lay purchasers have cultivated the land 

 worse than when it was in the hands of the monks ; even then, when time, which 

 influences every thing, shall have given the purchasers a secure possession, I doubt 

 whether the class of proprietor cultivators will effect any useful improvements in the 

 land. Every thing requisite is wanting to accomplish it, talent and capital. These 

 little farmers seem placed in a country to check the progress of innovation, and to pre- 

 vent all improvement in agriculture. 



377. That there has been considerable im2)rovement in France, he continues, " cannot, 

 however, be doubted ; but it is entirely produced by persons who have been thrown out 

 of their situations by the revolution, and whose exertions and leisure have been directed 

 to agriculture. They have spread a taste for it from one to another, in consequence of 

 the success of their experiments ; but still I cannot think it has been effected by throwing 

 national domains into the capital of the nation." [Letters, &c.) 



378. M. Chateauvieux is an agriculturist of great experience, and an able political economist. He has 

 been in most parts'of Europe at different times, and seems a very impartial writer : his opinion, therefore, 

 as to French agriculture may be considered as the nearest the truth of any that has yet appeared. 



SuBSECT. 2. Of the general Circumstances of France in respect to Agriculture. 



379. The surface of France has been divided by geographers into what are called 

 basins, or great plains, through which flow the principal rivers, and which basins are 

 separated by original or secondary ridges of mountains. The chief basins are that of 

 the Loire, {fg. 48. a); of the Seine, [b] ; of the Garonne, (c) ; and of the Rhone and 

 Saone, (d). [Journal de Physique, tom. xxx.) 



380. The soil of France has been divided by A. Young into the mountainous district 

 of Languedoc and Provence (e) ; tha loamy district of Lemosin (f) ; the chalky districts 

 of Champagne and Poitiers {g\; the gravelly district of Bourbonnois (A) ; the stony- 

 district of Lorraine and Franche Comte (i) ; the rich loam of Picardy and Guyenne [k) ; 

 and the heathy surface on gravel, or gravelly sand of Bretagne and Gascoigne (/). 

 {Agr. France, chap, ii.) 



381. The climate of France has been most ingeniously divided by A. Young into 

 that of corn and common British agriculture, {jig. 48. l^ b, k) ; that of vines, mulberries, 

 and common culture ( y, a, h, g, i) ; that of vines, mulberries, maize, and common culture 



48 



