But the (juestiou still recurs — how can this be possi- 

 ]»le ? The answer is, it becomes possible because of the 

 minute subdivision of the land, the small freeholds into 

 which all France is divided. Before the revolution of 

 1792 the lands were holden largely by the nobles and' 

 ])y the clergy, large portions being covered with forest. 

 These lands, of course, were cultivated by a tenantry, 

 and us the nobleman was exempted from the most op- 

 pressive portion of the taxation, all exactions fell upon 

 the land and upon labor. But the French revolution 

 changed all that. All the lands of the Church and of 

 the nobles were declared public domain, and being made 

 the basis of the currency, were sold out in small parcels^ 

 Much of the forests were cut off, the land put into form 

 for tillage, and, in jealousy lest the nobles should again 

 accumulate land in large quantities through laws of entail 

 and primogeniture, the people made it a portion of the 

 fundamental law that all patrimonies should be equally 

 divided among children, leaving 1)ut one-third to be dis^- 

 posed of by the parent if he had two children, and one- 

 ([uarter only if he had three. This provision of law has 

 withstood the several changes of government, and an 

 attempt to modify it by Charles X was, perhaps, the 

 primary cause of the revolution of 1830. The effect of 

 this salutary law has been the sul^division of landed 

 estates and other property in France until the result has 

 been attained which we have seen. The farms averao-e 

 less than fifteen acres and there are over three million of 

 farms containing; ten acres or less. The farms in Massa- 



'& 



chusetts average 100 acres each. Do we wonder now 

 at the difference in cultivation ? 



May we not deduce, therefore, fairly from this analy- 

 2 



