! 300 Plan proposed, and Objections answered. for the average size, according to the metic and nature! aug It is not proposed, however, to subdi. vide the country with unvarying exact ness in this manner. The different qualities of land require a great diversity in the dimensions of farms; and political and social freedom require the admission of a certain latitude of size. Vice will be a means of reducing the area of one man's farm; and virtue ought to ment the area of another within certain limits. No prohibition is proposed, but merely such restrictions as should discou rage engrossments, and promote the subdivision of land. Every 80 acres of average quality might be assumed to have a farm-house upon them, as was enacted by Henry VII. and Elizabeth, in regard to 20 acres, and they should be assessed for its taxes. Farms of above a certain rental, might also pay a certain rate collected from landlord and tenant; of a higher rental, a higher rate, and so on, in such proportions that those above 1000l. rental, should pay 10s. in the pound, from occupiers and landlords. Perhaps however the tax might be levied at so much per acre, according to three or four qualines of land. Yet neither of these plans may be the best that could be devised, and others may be suggested more operative and more effectual; but the principle will not be impeached, though, to correct the evil, these and many other plans should fail in succession. The scale of taxation per pound of rental on all land in one occupation, might, on the expiration of existing leases, be something like the following: (Nov. 1, venue of the state, with corresponding additions to the happiness, subsistence, and independence, of the people. of its Instead however of any permanent system of state-policy calculated to restrain the engrossinent of farms, the bene ficial effects of such engrossments are sophistically maintained; and even a board government vauntingly tells us, in publications, of farms of 1500 and 2000 acres, and exults in the pretended discovery that the population of the empire is not affected by such engrossments, it being found that on certain large farms in Scotland there exist 150 or 200 souls; that is to say, one laird, and 149, or 199, menials, slaves, or vassals! Thus at this day we have to bear with an unblushingapology for a revived system of villenage, in opposition to reason and nature, proceeding, not from obscure writers, but from persons enjoying authority in the state, and respect in the circles of science and literature! Other writers who have contended that farmers ought to be at liberty to extend theirs peculations in land, just as persons in trade are at liberty to extend their speculations indefinitely, lose sight of a grand principle of social economy. They forget that land is of DEFINITE QUAN TITY, and also an article of the FIRST NECESSITY; and that monopolies are only injurious and dangerous when affecting articles of primary necessity, which exist in limited quantity. Thus it is of little consequence to the community, how much wool, cotton, broad cloth, or sugar, a man monopolizes, because they exist in indefinite quantities, and, though very useful, are not of the first necessity. The injury done by any monopoly, is in the compound ratio of its limited quantity, and its importance to man's existence. Nothing is more limited or definite in its quantity than LAND, and nothing of more importance to the welfare and existence of man-to monopolize land, is consequently the most pernicious of all monopolies, and the highest crime in the shape of monopoly that can be committed against society. There is then this difference be tween the primary trade of a farmer, and the various secondary employments of society that speculations in regard to one, become fatal and criminal mono polies, owing to the definite quantity and primary importance of the article; and that speculations in all other commodities are comparatively harmless, and ofter often necessary to successful engagements in them. It is also a detestable maxim of this antisocial faction, that the soil produces more for the public market when in the hands of a few than of many. We must not however forget, that they tell us also, and adduce facts in proof, that large farms employ an equal population with small ones. But in regard to the quantity carried to market, we main tain, without the hazard of being substantially contradicted, that their assertion IS UTTERLY FALSE. It is a base invention; and as absurd as base, to assert, that the labour of ten persons would produce as much as twenty. In small farms, families live on "the odds and ends" of careful management, and turn every rood to good account, subsisting themselves on what constitutes the waste and superfluities of large farms, and carrying substantially as much, or more, in proportion, to the public market. "The rich man's pastimes are the poor man's wealth, And yield him plenty, happiness, and health; These gave enough, enough's prosperity; plan." Pratt's Cottage Pictures. Nor in this place should we forget to refer to first principles, to the genuine basis of society, and to the ends of the social compact and of all industry; or omit to consider who are the persons to be supplied at the public market, and what pretensions they have, or ought to have, to starve the country, and destroy the basis of that superstructure, of which they form but a subordinate part. Another argument adduced by the monopolists about Capital, merits notice, because it is so constantly adduced and put so forward. They tell us, that large farmers have more capital than small ones-good, and this may be granted. But does a small farmer require so great a capital as a large farmer? If the large farmer has capital enough for his enlarged speculations, so has the small farmer for his limited objects.-If the small farmer has not enough, neither has the large farmer!-One assumption is quite as good as the other, the whole argument being founded on a false assump tion, and on a gross blunder in arithmetic. If capital is required for expe riments, by which to improve the prac tice of agriculture for the general good, such capital ought to be drawn from the public stock, and experimental farms instituted; but if the executive government fail to perform this duty for the public, it does not become the only alternative that the whole economy of a country should be subverted, to afford the chance of having superfluous capital employed in experimental farming! But to refute the interested sophistry of the powerful party of the monopolists, would occupy much space to little pur pose. They may starve five out of ten of the agricultural population, and make slaves of four out of the other five; they may weep over the oppressions from taxes and poor's-rates, suffered by small farmers, and reconcile themselves to the alternative of converting them into day labourers, or driving them into workhouses; they may persuade themselves that improved rents, in creased produce, wealthy farmers, and abundant markets, are the peculiar results of their system; and it may be to them matter of indifference who suffers that bigh rents may be paid, whether produce is really augmented or not, how many become poor for one that grows rich, or whether the overgrown population of the towns can partake of the luxuries that are exhibited at the markets; yet they cannot alter the deter minations of arithmetic, or expand the sur face of the soil. If the engrossment of farms do not diminish the agricultural population, as some of the monopolists pretend, then, I object to the practice, because I protest against a population of slaves; and here, as a freeman, and a friend to freedom, I MAKE MY STAND! But if the engrossment diminish the number of mouths and labourers fed by the bounty of nature in the country, then I object to the practice, because it is the right of all to live; and here, as a friend to human happiness, I again MAKE MY STAND! If therefore farms of 2000 acres, contain 200 souls, then I demand that there be 30 tenants of such a tract, with 30 independent fathers or heads of families, instead of one overgrowp, care-worn, and pampered laird. But if such farms can be well culti vated by 50 souls, and it be a recom mendation mendation of them that they drive the superfluous population into large cities, where handicraft trades are not wanted, and where of foreign produce there already exists an unwholesome satiety, then the bare enunciation of such a proposition is ANTI-SOCIAL, and evidently destructive of 150 souls out of 200. The moral deformities produced by a system of engrossing farms are so numerous, palpable, and afflicting, that to enlarge upon them would be to suppose, that men travel without seeing, understand without thinking, and feel without sensibility. Yet after all, there are a numerous body of cold-blooded politicians, who affect to be as well pleased with a population of slaves as of freemen; who seem to think that the many were made for the few; and who pertinaciously maintain hat monopoly best accords with the interests of that few, and with the march of civilization from the personal independence of savages, to that vassal subordination that pampers the pride of aristocracy. Ill fares the land, to hast'ning ills a prey, Where wealth accumulates, and men decay; Princes or lords may flourish, or may fade; A breath can make them, as a breath has made; But a bold peasantry, their country's pride, When once destroy'd, can never be supply'd," Goldsmith's Deserted Village. It is however the duty of enlightened minds to resist such base doctrines, and of free legislation to consider and support the interests of the many, against the monopolies of the few. If landlords can obtain better rents from monopolists than from small farmers, it then becomes the duty of legislation to interfere for the benefit of the community, and to reconcile the interests of the landlord and small farmer; but if that is impracticable, then to discourage by taxation; and finally, if necessary, to prevent by imperative laws, the sacrifice of the whole population to the cupidity of monopolists, and the selfish feelings of a few landlords. In truth, the common benefit of the whole might easily be reconciled, if the attempt were made in the spirit of bene. volence; and the COUNTRY may live, and the TOWNS may flourish better, far better, without, than with, the aid of that speculating system which embitters the existence of one portion of the people with CRUEL PRIVATIONS, while it generates Cares that render the lives of the other portion a state of SPLENDID MISERY! Nor in making arrangements to protect the provisions of nature against the ar tifices of society, need LANDLORDS be called upon to concede any right or power, equal in value to the benefits which they would themselves partake from any change of system that ame liorated the general condition of the community. A law, founded on social expediency, which ought to restrain them in common from letting their lands in lots of undue size, except on paying a tax to the state, would at the same instant add to the number of competitors, so as to uphold the value of land. And if the restraint were felt to be irksome by some arbitrary spirits, it should be duly considered that society is a state of individual restraint for the common benefit, in regard to most of the actions and relations of life; that all laws ope rate as restraints on individual interests and passions for the general good; and that if restraint is necessary and expedient in any one case, more than any other, it ought to be enforced against that anti-social practice which destroys the happiness of the mass of the people, threatens them with universal vassalage, swallows up their natural inheritance, cheats industry of its reward, and mili tates against all those advantages which might otherwise have attended a high state of Civilization. Never was a subject more pregnant with topics calculated to enlist the passions on its side than this. But when arguments are founded on the unerring basis of arithmetic, when there is no pos sible equivocation between the arithme tical premises and the arithmetical con clusion, there can be no occasion to address the judgment through the medium of the passions. Besides, the poets, always true to nature, have so fully anticipated the feelings which the subject suggests, that nothing remains to be performed. Let the reader shed a tear over the Deserted Village of GOLDSMITH; let his judgment be impassioned by the fervid lines of PRATT, in his beautiful Cottage Pictures, and he will then not only think with the writer, but will also feel with him, and become a zealous advocate of the same cause: Teach erring man to spurn the rage of gain: "Aid slighted truth, with his persuasive straing Teach him, that states of native strength pos swift decay, That TRADE'S PROUD EMPIRE hastes to thought extravagant, yet it is hardly possible "to be guilty of excess in our ap◄ plause." As ocean sweeps the labour'd mole away; SIR, MA As Ben Jonson says, "He was not for an age, but for all time." Had Shakespeare, great magician, liv'd in When idol worship was the public law, Sept. 23, 1813. To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. SIR, Heyne's Cotyledon, I submit the following account. ANY are the little cavillers, who, like summer insects, buz and skir. mish around the majesty of Shakespeare. For my part I cannot hesitate to pronounce him the greatest of all poets, ancient or modern. It has been seriously objected to him, that he mixes together buffoonery and tragedy, but these critics's inquiries respecting Dr. N answer to your correspondent, forgot that the poet was born of nature; themselves of art. There is no wonder that the poet and the critics disagree. Do we not see in life the serious and the comic alternately exhibited, within the extension of every little hour? What boundless variety enchants the reader of the dramas of Shakespeare! What dullness and sorrowful apathy reign through out the productions of those who take the critics' counsel! His pathetic pieces are not less pathetic on this account; but perhaps the more so. The human mind cannot sustain a continual pressure of sorrow; it grows weary, and in some measure disgusted, with the uniformity of Inisery; an interval of milder scenes, naturally introduced, relieves and refreshens, and the heart returns to the land of woe Be with greater appetite and interest. The 1 The plant in question was first described by Lamarck under the title of Cotyledon pinnata, according to the third volume of the second edition of the Hortus Kewensis, under which name it is there inserted. It is a native of the Mauritius and the Moluccas, was introduced into this country, from the Calcutta garden, by Dr. Roxburgh, in the year 1800, and about five years subsequent to its arrival here, a drawing of the plant, in flower, was taken at the garden of the late Right Hon. Charles Greville, Paddington Green, which was published in the Paradisus Londinensis,t by R. A. Salisbury, esq. as a nondescript, under the title of Bryophyllum calycinum; since that period it has been published in the Botanical Magazine under the same. It is therefore not to be wondered at that your correspon * It is a digression from this subject, but I merely insert it for the information of the botanical public, that the Dr. has been on his way to this country from Calcatta, for some time past; but owing to inhas been obliged to stop at Madeira. disposition, which is considered dangerous, + Here I observe, what a benefit would have accrued to the botanical community, had this valuable work continued, and had not an unfortunate contention put a period to its procedure; however, a fair opportunity now offers for its recommencement, should the authors be reconciled to cach other. The editors of the Botanical Magazine are the only persons now in action, they having many more subjects sent them of the metropolis, than can possibly be by all the nurserymen within the suburbs drawn and published, in that truly excellent work; consequently many a beautiful flower is unavoidably allowed "to blush anseen," that is, by the eyes of the public. dents dent, "being acquainted with all the different species of the genus Cotyledon in present cultivation," should not know this plant as a Cotyledon, which, although it is now common in our gardens, is better (and in fact is only) known by the title of Bryophyllum. The variation of taste of its leaves in different parts of the day I have examined; it is a very singular character. Whether this plant is a true species of Cotyledon, still remains a doubt; subsequent investigations may determine it. Those scientific and very acute botanists, Dr. Solander and Mr. Dryander, strengthened Lamarck's opinion, by considering it a Cotyledon. On the contrary, Mr. Salisbury and Dr. Sims are of opinion that it differs very materially from Cotyledon, not only in the number of the parts of fructification, (being octandrous, whereas Cotyledon is decandrous,) but likewise in the form of the corolla, the relative proportion of the calyx and it, and especially in having the stamens arranged in one rank. Mr. Haworth, in his late publication on succulent plants, states, (while speaking of this plant under the title of Bryophillum) “it forms a very distinct genus," i. e. from Cotyledon. Sept. 6, 1813. Ανδράχνη. To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. IN SIR, None of the numbers of the Monthly Magazine some time ago, I read some observations and calculations on the Go. vernment Tontines. I hold three shares of 100l. each, viz. two in the Irish Tontine of 1777, and one in that of 1775; the half year's dividend I received on these three, to the 25th of December, 1800, was 12l. 8s. 6d; and the half year, to Midsummer last, was 147. 2s. 4d. this appears a very small rise in twelve years and a half. On looking over the book of living nominees, it is remarkable that the greater number of these nominees, and many of them for many shares, are born and resident at Geneva. Certificates of their existence are no doubt produced at the offices; but I submit to those concerned, whether there may not be something wrong, and a possibility of deception somewhere; which, from the distance and other circumstances, it may not be very easy for the gentlemen in the Tontine offices to elucidate here, and to ascertain whether every nominee, reported to be now living, is the life originally named. I observe too, that most of the forfeited shares are on lives at Geneva, which circumstance rather strengthens my argument. The original dividend per cent. of that of 1775 was 67.; and in that of 1777, 74 per cent., so that in the long run of thirty-eight years, they have only rose about S4 per cent. Perhaps some of your readers might point out a remedy against imposition, F. A. London, Sept. 17, 1813. To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. SIR, T the legal murder of a poor printer, AT who underwent a mock trial at the Old Bailey in 1663, for the assumed treason of printing an alleged Libel, a "Lord Chief Justice Hide" is described as the presiding judge, assisted by one Keeling, a wretch who was afterwards disgraced by a public vote of the House of Lords. Who was this Hide? Clarendon was chancellor at the time, not lord chief justice; and yet no other Hide enjoyed the distinction of high office. The murder of Palm of Nuremberg, was the act of a military tribunal, in the confusion of a seat of war-but this murder was deliberately committed by Hide and Keeling, under the authority of Charles II. in a state of public peace, according to the forms of law, and under the sanction of a grand and petty jury. JUSTITIA. To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. IN SIR, Na former volume of the Monthly Magazine, some account is given of a system of artificial memory, by your ingenious correspondent, "Cominon Sense." This system contained, by an. ticipation, all that is valuable in the lectures on memory, which have been lately delivered in this country at the moderate expense of five guineas the course. Your correspondent also anticipated the arrival of the great teacher of Mnemonics, when he was yet on the continent, and had the misfortune to be classed in the Moniteur with the public impostors of Europe. Some of the subscribers to those lectures, may perhaps want artificial aid to recollect the advantages they have received from them; to such the following poetical exposé may be acceptable: How kind to John Bull was the Prussian eagle, To send him the learned Professor Fineegale, Who can teach in an hour, for five guineas apiece, All the science of Egypt and wisdom of Greece, By |
