CHAPTER VII. 



THE LANDED INTEREST IN ITS EELATIONSHIP TO THE 

 COMMUNITY. 



We have shown how the extravagant ideas of the earlier 

 economists on the subject of trade had forced many philo- 

 sophical theorists of the eighteenth century back to a study 

 of nature, in which they found not only a refuge from artificial 

 restriction, but a reservoir of fresh ideas on all subjects of 

 domestic importance. "We have demonstrated how, to Quesnai 

 and his following, agricultural labour was alone productive, 

 while all other industry was barren. But if the produce of 

 the soil was the gratuitous gift of the land, and if the surplus 

 that remained after paying all the expenses of production 

 belonged to the landlords, it follow^ed that the latter possessed 

 the one sole source of national wealth, and consequently that 

 they alone could distribute it amongst the community. There- 

 fore on them fell the payment of all taxes, and so it was but 

 right that in their hands should rest the reins of government. 

 It further followed that since from the landowner the public 

 funds were alone derivable, the Government, by thus sharing 

 in the net produce, became a co-proprietor of the soil. By 

 theorists such as these an undue importance was attached to 

 everything connected with the land, and the practice and 

 customs of its cultivators became of national importance. 

 For, as Adam Smith pointed out, the great body of the people 

 was far more deeply involved in a system of profitable hus- 

 bandry than the landlords. " If," says he, " the land, which, 

 in one state of cultivation affords a rent of ten millions sterling 

 a year, would in another, afford a rent of twenty millions ; 

 the rent being, in both cases, supposed a third part of the 



i;ii 



