按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
Plato； to maintain five thousand idle men （the number of warriors
supposed necessary for its defence） together with their women and
servants； would require； he says； a territory of boundless extent
and fertility； like the plains of Babylon。
The pride of man makes him love to domineer； and nothing
mortifies him so much as to be obliged to condescend to persuade
his inferiors。 Wherever the law allows it； and the nature of the
work can afford it； therefore； he will generally prefer the
service of slaves to that of freemen。 The planting of sugar and
tobacco can afford the expense of slave…cultivation。 The raising
of corn； it seems； in the present times； cannot。 In the English
colonies； of which the principal produce is corn； the far greater
part of the work is done by freemen。 The late resolution of the
Quakers in Pennsylvania to set at liberty all their negro slaves
may satisfy us that their number cannot be very great。 Had they
made any considerable part of their property； such a resolution
could never have been agreed to。 In our sugar colonies； on the
contrary； the whole work is done by slaves； and in our tobacco
colonies a very great part of it。 The profits of a
sugar…plantation in any of our West Indian colonies are generally
much greater than those of any other cultivation that is known
either in Europe or America； and the profits of a tobacco
plantation； though inferior to those of sugar； are superior to
those of corn； as has already been observed。 Both can afford the
expense of slave…cultivation； but sugar can afford it still
better than tobacco。 The number of negroes accordingly is much
greater； in proportion to that of whites； in our sugar than in
our tobacco colonies。
To the slave cultivators of ancient times gradually
succeeded a species of farmers known at present in France by the
name of metayers。 They are called in Latin； Coloni partiarii。
They have been so long in disuse in England that at present I
know no English name for them。 The proprietor furnished them with
the seed； cattle； and instruments of husbandry； the whole stock；
in short； necessary for cultivating the farm。 The produce was
divided equally between the proprietor and the farmer； after
setting aside what was judged necessary for keeping up the stock；
which was restored to the proprietor when the farmer either
quitted； or was turned out of the farm。
Land occupied by such tenants is properly cultivated at the
expense of the proprietor as much as that occupied by slaves。
There is； however； one very essential difference between them。
Such tenants； being freemen； are capable of acquiring property；
and having a certain proportion of the produce of the land； they
have a plain interest that the whole produce should be as great
as possible； in order that their own proportion may be so。 A
slave； on the contrary； who can acquire nothing but his
maintenance； consults his own ease by making the land produce as
little as possible over and above that maintenance。 It is
probable that it was partly upon account of this advantage； and
partly upon account of the encroachments which the sovereign；
always jealous of the great lords； gradually encouraged their
villains to make upon their authority； and which seem at last to
have been such as rendered this species of servitude altogether
inconvenient； that tenure in villanage gradually wore out through
the greater part of Europe。 The time and manner； however； in
which so important a revolution was brought about is one of the
most obscure points in modern history。 The Church of Rome claims
great merit in it； and it is certain that so early as the twelfth
century； Alexander III published a bull for the general
emancipation of slaves。 It seems； however； to have been rather a
pious exhortation than a law to which exact obedience was
required from the faithful。 Slavery continued to take place
almost universally for several centuries afterwards； till it was
gradually abolished by the joint operation of the two interests
above mentioned； that of the proprietor on the one hand； and that
of the sovereign on the other。 A villain enfranchised； and at the
same time allowed to continue in possession of the land； having
no stock of his own； could cultivate it only by means of what the
landlord advanced to him； and must； therefore； have been what the
French called a metayer。
It could never； however； be the interest even of this last
species of cultivators to lay out； in the further improvement of
the land； any part of the little stock which they might save from
their own share of the produce； because the lord； who laid out
nothing； was to get one half of whatever it produced。 The tithe；
which is but a tenth of the produce； is found to be a very great
hindrance to improvement。 A tax； therefore； which amounted to one
half must have been an effectual bar to it。 It might be the
interest of a metayer to make the land produce as much as could
be brought out of it by means of the stock furnished by the
proprietor； but it could never be his interest to mix any part of
his own with it。 In France； where five parts out of six of the
whole kingdom are said to be still occupied by this species of
cultivators； the proprietors complain that their metayers take
every opportunity of employing the master's cattle rather in
carriage than in cultivation； because in the one case they get
the whole profits to themselves； in the other they share them
with their landlord。 This species of tenants still subsists in
some parts of Scotland。 They are called steel…bow tenants。 Those
ancient English tenants； who are said by Chief Baron Gilbert and
Doctor Blackstone to have been rather bailiffs of the landlord
than farmers properly so called； were probably of the same kind。
To this species of tenancy succeeded； though by very slow
degrees； farmers properly so called； who cultivated the land with
their own stock； paying a rent certain to the landlord。 When such
farmers have a lease for a term of years； they may sometimes find
it for their interest to lay out part of their capital in the
further improvement of the farm； because they may sometimes
expect to recover it； with a large profit； before the expiration
of the lease。 The possession even of such farmers； however； was
long extremely precarious； and still is so in many parts of
Europe。 They could before the expiration of their term be legally
outed of their lease by a new purchaser； in England； even by the
fictitious action of a common recovery。 If they were turned out
illegally by the violence of their master； the action by which
they obtained redress was extremely imperfect。 It did not always
reinstate them in the possession of the land； but gave them
damages which never amounted to the real loss。 Even in England；
the country perhaps of Europe where the yeomanry has always been
most respected； it was not till about the 14th of Henry VII that
the action of ejectment was invented； by which the tenant
recovers； not damages only but possession； and in which his claim
is not necessarily concluded by the uncertain decision of a
single assize。 This action has been found so effectual a remedy
that； in the modern practice； when the landlord has occasion to
sue for the possession of the land； he seldom makes use of the
actions which properly belong to him as landlord； the Writ of
Right or the Writ of Entry； but sues in the name of his tenant by
the Writ of Ejectment。 In England； therefore； the security of the
tenant is equal to that of the proprietor。 In England； besides； a
lease for life of forty shillings a year value is a freehold； and
entitles the lessee to vote for a Member of Parliament； and as a
great part of the yeomanry have freeholds of this kind； the whole
order becomes respectable to their landlords on account of the
political consideration which this gives them。 There is； I
believe； nowhere in Europe； except in England； any instance of
the tenant building upon the land of which he had no lease； and
trusting that the honour of his landlord would t