1836.] 



FARMERS' REGISTER. 



647 



which insligate to marriage, still continue: what 

 then is the consequence, but the most dreadful 

 misery imaginable ! You soon would exceed the 

 populousness of China, where the putrid carcasses 

 of dogs, cats, rats, and every species of filth and 

 vermin, are sought with avidity, to sustain the life 

 of wretches who were born only to be starved. 

 Such are the infallible effects of carrying into ex- 

 ecution a too minute division of landed property. 

 No country upon earth is cursed with so bad a 

 government as that would be, which aimed se- 

 riously at such a division; so ruinous is that popula- 

 tion, which arises from principles pure and virtu- 

 ous in their origin, but leads directly to the ex- 

 tremes of human misery! Great cities have been 

 called the graves of human species: if they con- 

 duct easily to the "rave, they become the best eut- 

 hanasia of too much populousness. They are 

 more apt to prevent increase than to destroy, 

 which is precisely the effect wanted in such a 

 country as France, where the division of property 

 has unhappily nursed up a population, which she 

 cannot i'eed; what, therefore, would be the misery, 

 if cities and towns supported their numbers, and 

 left the whole surplus of the country regorging in 

 the cottages? This is too much the case for the 

 happiness of the kingdom, as we see in a thousand 

 circumstances, and particularly in the distress ari- 

 sing from the least, failure in the crops; such a de- 

 ficiency, as in England passes almost without no- 

 tice, in France is attended with dreadful calami- 

 ties. There cannot be a more pleasing spectacle, 

 or better framed to call into animation the sympa- 

 thies of our nature, than that of a family living on 

 a little property, which their industry cultivates, 

 and perhaps created: it is this object, so touching 

 to the best feelings of the human bosom, that has 

 certainly made many writers indiscriminate advo- 

 cates for small properties. If the industry of towns 

 and manufactures were active enough to demand 

 the surplus of all this population as fast as it arose, 

 the advantages of the system would be clear; but 

 France knows, by sad experience, that such a sur- 

 plus is not demanded at present; what, iherelbre, 

 would the consequence be of bringing a fresh one 

 to market, while the old one remains on hand? It 

 is idle to cite the example of America, where an 

 immensity of fertile land lies open to every one 

 who will accept it; and where population is valua- 

 ble to an unexampled degree, as we see in the 

 price of their labor; but what comparison, between 

 such a country and France, where the competition 

 for employment is so great, arising from too great 

 a populousness, that the price of labor is 76 per 

 cent, below that of its more flourishing neighbor? 

 But, in considering this interesting subjectj 1 shall 

 recur, as I have done on so many other occasions, 

 to the example of England. In this kingdom, 

 small properties are exceedingly rare; in great 

 numbers of our counties, there is scarcely any such 

 thing to be found: Our laboring poor are justly 

 emulous of being the proprietors of their cottages, 

 and of that scrap of land, a few perches, which 

 form the garden; but they seldom think of buying 

 land enough to employ themselves; and, as in 

 France, of offering prices so much beyond the 

 value, as to ensure the acquisition; a man that has 

 two or three hundred pounds with us, does not buy 

 a little field, but. stocks a farm: now, as our labor- 

 ing poor are incomparably more at their ease, and 

 in every respect happier than those of France, 



does it not appear to follow, by fair conclusion, that 

 small properties are by no means necessary for the 

 welfare of the lower classes in the country? in ev- 

 ery part of England, in which I have been, there 

 is no comparison between the case of a day-labor- 

 er and of a very little farmer; we have no people 

 that work so hard, and fare so ill, as the latter.* 

 Why then should this minute division be consid- 

 ered as so advantageous in France, while we in 

 England feel the benefit of a system directly con- 

 trary? There are several reasons for this; the man- 

 ufactures of France, compared with those of Eng- 

 land, are not nearly so considerable respectively, 

 in proportion to the population of the two king- 

 doms. Nor docs the agriculture of France, which 

 is carried on either by farmers or metayers, afford 

 any employment comparable to that which Eng- 

 lish culture yields. Country gentlemen, in France, 

 do not employ probably the hundredth part of the 

 laborers that are employed by country gentlemen 

 in England, who have always some works of or- 

 namental gardening or farming going on, which 

 gives bread 1o many people. An object, more im- 

 portant, is, that the prices of provisions are as dear 

 in France as in England, while those of labor are 

 76 per cent, lower. We have another proof if any 

 were wanted, how much too great the population 

 of that kingdom is. The English laborer, who 

 commands steadily eight, nine, or ten shillings a 

 week, by working for a farmer, hazards much 

 when he labors land for himself; and this fact is so 

 strong, that the most industrious and hard laboring 

 of our poor peasants, are not those who keep their 

 gardens in the best order and cultivation; but such, 

 on the contrary, as make inferior earnings, that 

 mark something of debility. By means of these, 

 and various other causes, the poor countrymen in 

 England find a much more regular employment 

 by day labor than those of France, who, having 

 no resource in working tor others, are obliged to 

 work for themselves, or starve. And when" gen- 

 tlemen find them in this situation, no wonder they 

 readily expatiate on the advantages of small pro- 

 perties being to such families the only resource 

 that offers. But, in fact, the very height of ope- 

 rose culture upon such, and what appears perfec- 

 tion to a vulgar eye, can arise only from the mise- 

 ry of half employed people. The clearness of la- 

 bor, very common in such a country, is no proof 

 against this observation. No labor is so wretched- 

 ly performed, and so dear, as that of hired hands 

 accustomed much to labor for themselves; there is 

 a disgust, and a listlessness that cannot escape an 

 intelligent observer; and nothing- but real distress 

 will drive such little proprietors to work at all for 

 others; so that I have seen, in the operosely culti- 

 vated parts of France, labor comparatively dear, 

 and ii! performed, amidst swarms of half idle peo- 

 ple. And here I should remark, the circumstance 

 seen to so strange a degree in almost all the mar- 

 kets of France, that swarms of people regularly 

 lose one day in a week, for objects that clearly 

 show of how little value time is of to these small 



* The present miserable condition of the English 

 laboring class, does not invalidate the author's reason- 

 ing. That misery is principally caused by the poor 

 laws of England, a system even more calculated to in- 

 crease population and wretchedness, than the minute 

 divisions of land in France. Er. Fabm. Reg. 



