of Edinburgh, Session 1871-72. 
631 
be, it will be paid wholly by the landlords. The tax in this case 
does not diminish the supply of land. 
A cognate question of great interest is, Who reaps the benefit of 
any improvements in agriculture, making land return more than it 
previously did ? This improvement may require, and probably will 
require, increased investment of capital. The whole supply curve 
will be raised; assuming the demand to remain the same, fig. SjM'T)" 
will be the new increased number of acres in cultivation, but land 
will be left uncultivated which would have returned the interest 
OM on capital. The volume standing on D'D"N" will be much 
greater than that on D'DN, for the third dimension will also have 
increased ; the average rate of interest and the trade profit of the 
tenant will have increased, and it is highly probable that the 
volume standing on D"M"N" may be greater than that which 
stood on JDNM ; but this is by no means certain. It might at first 
be actually smaller. In all probability, however, the demand 
curve is very nearly vertical, a small increase of profit tempting a 
largely increased investment of capital in farming. If this be so, 
then the landlord also reaps considerable benefit from the improve- 
ment, for if the farmers were contented with nearly the same rate 
of interest as before, the solid standing on DRNN'T)" which he 
gains would be larger than the solid on DRM"M which he loses; 
moreover, the volume on RNM", which he retains, is increased. 
Labourers "and consumers also gain. 
