J J 0^ cons .—Mode* of Cultivation . 



ripen all together, they object to the sickle because 

 a o-otrfl deal of grain is lost In tailing nut "hile being 

 rut. There may be mhuc truth in the first objection 

 and its cause might in time he returned . In re- 

 gard to the second, the loss by shaking is a iuere 

 trifle, compared with the enhanced expense incurred 

 by rejecting tiie sickle. 



It appears, therefore, that by judicious management, 

 capital expended is returned within the second jear, 

 the seasons, being propitious ; leaving a balance of 

 profit in the cultivation of 20 orlongs of ahout 70 

 Spanish dollars. But it is obvious that were the bare 

 capital to be recovered and no more, within such a short 

 time, the speculation would heaven i'avoi able one 

 yhere capital hail no other more advantageous outlet. 



RENT. 



Ample as the above-described profit may be con- 

 sidered, yet the inoney-rent of land is not always pror 

 DO! tinned to it. We have been viewing the proprie T 

 tor and ryot in one person. Disjoin the two and the 

 state of the case is disproportionately altered. 



The highest rate of money-rent as yet does pot ex T 

 teed 4 Spanish dollars an orlnng ( !| of an acre) the ave- 

 rage being about 2J dollars. But * hen ihe rent is 

 paid m kind, its amount is frequently nearly doubled. 

 Money-rent is almost invariably paid in (ulvatitf, 

 while rent in kind is paid after the harvest. In the 

 latter instance, a poor tenant eaii give no other secu^ 

 rity than that of the expected crop, unless indeed he 

 mortgages bis land. To this subject I will revert 

 herrafter. Hut a proprietor will 1>est consult his own 

 advantage by taking a fur less usurious one. 



A not 1 * labor for six months, were lie only to em- 

 ploy himself in his rice cultivation, would he gftotil 13 

 famish dollars value. But he is not confined entire. 

 1\. to it. for his family can watch it while he iacinplmi^ 



IT * 



