however, is supposed to be one-fifth, not only
of the rent of all the land, but of that of all
the houses, and of the interest of all the capital
stock of Great Britain, that part of it
only excepted which is either lent to the public,
or employed as farming stock in the cultivation
of land. A very considerable part
of the produce of this tax arises from the
rent of houses and the interest of capital stock.
The land tax of the city of London, for example,
at four shillings in the pound, amounts
to L.123,399 : 6 : 7; that of the city
of Westminster to L.63,092 : 1 : 5; that of
the palaces of Whitehall and St. James's to
L.30,754 : 6 : 3. A certain proportion of
the land tax is, in the same manner, assessed
upon all the other cities and towns corporate
in the kingdom; and arises almost altogether,
either from the rent of houses, or from what
is supposed to be the interest of trading and
capital stock. According to the estimation,
therefore, by which Great Britain is rated to
the land tax, the whole mass of revenue arising
from the rent of all the lands, from that
of all the houses, and from the interest of all
the capital stock, that part of it only excepted
which is either lent to the public, or employed
in the cultivation of land, does not
exceed ten millions sterling a-year, the ordinary
revenue which government levies upon
the people even in peaceable times. The
estimation by which Great Britain is rated to
the land tax is, no doubt, taking the whole
kingdom at an average, very much below the
real value; though in several particular counties
and districts it is said to be nearly equal
to that value. The rent of the lands alone,
exclusive of that of houses and of the interest
of stock, has by many people been estimated
at twenty millions; an estimation
made in a great measure at random, and
which, I apprehend, is as likely to be above
as below the truth. But if the lands of
Great Britain, in the present state of their
cultivation, do not afford a rent of more than
twenty millions a-year, they could not well
afford the half, most probably not the fourth
part of that rent, if they all belonged to a
single proprietor, and were put under the
negligent, expensive, and oppressive management
of his factors and agents. The crown
lands of Great Britain do not at present afford
the fourth part of the rent which could
probably be drawn from them if they were
the property of private persons. If the crown
lands were more extensive, it is probable, they
would be still worse managed.
The revenue which the great body of the
people derives from land is, in proportion,
not to the rent, but to the produce of the
land. The whole annual produce of the
land of every country, if we except what is
reserved for seed, is either annually consumed
by the great body of the people, or exchanged
for something else that is consumed
by them. Whatever keeps down the produce
of the land below what it would otherwise
rise to, keeps down the revenue of the great
body of the people, still more than it does
that of the proprietors of land. The rent of
land, that portion of the produce which belongs
to the proprietors, is scarce anywhere
in Great Britain supposed to be more than a
third part of the whole produce. If the land
which, in one state of cultivation, affords a
revenue of ten millions sterling a-year, would
in another afford a rent of twenty millions;
the rent being, in both cases, supposed a
third part of the produce, the revenue of the
proprietors would be less than it otherwise
might be, by ten millions a-year only; but
the revenue of the great body of the people
would be less than it otherwise might be, by
thirty millions a-year, deducting only what
would be necessary for seed. The population
of the country would be less by the number
of people which thirty millions a-year, deducting
always the seed, could maintain, according
to the particular mode of living, and
expense which might take place in the different
ranks of men, among whom the remainder
was distributed.
Though there is not at present in Europe,
any civilized state of any kind which derives
the greater part of its public revenue from
the rent of lands which are the property of
the state; yet, in all the great monarchies
of Europe, there are still many large tracts
of land which belong to the crown. They
are generally forest, and sometimes forests
where, after travelling several miles, you will
scarce find a single tree; a mere waste and
loss of country, in respect both of produce
and population. In every great monarchy of
Europe, the sale of the crown lands would
produce a very large sum of money, which,
if applied to the payment of the public debts,
would deliver from mortgage a much greater
revenue than any which those lands have ever
afforded to the crown. In countries where
lands, improved and cultivated very highly,
and yielding, at the time of sale, as great a
rent as can easily be got from them, commonly
sell at thirty years purchase; the unimproved,
uncultivated, and low-rented crown
lands, might well be expected to sell at forty,
fifty, or sixty years purchase. The crown
might immediately enjoy the revenue which
this great price would redeem from mortgage.
In the course of a few years, it would
probably enjoy another revenue. When the
crown lands had become private property,
they would, in the course of a few years, become
well improved and well cultivated.
The increase of their produce would increase
the population of the country, by augmenting
the revenue and consumption of the people.
But the revenue which the crown derives