I imagine I am not far from the mark in saying, that the average annual value of the unimproved forest land is rather under than exceeds the average sum paid throughout the parish to the rates; viz. about four shillings an acre. The rest of the land throughout the township is of very indifferent quality, and likewise in a very low state of cultivation; probably from the extreme poverty of the parish. I am not bringing this case forward as an instance of a very depressed parish' as to its rates, compared with its rental; but the most distressing circumstances of the place yet remain to be added. First, There is not one opulent person in the whole township: neither is there one single inhabitant that can be said to have made a fortune, whether in farming, manufacture, or trade. Next, another very distressing feature is, that the population is mainly, if not wholly, manufacturing: for the farming laborers are next to none, there being little either of capital or spirit to lead to their employ. And lastly, what is perhaps worse than all, whatever wealth is obtained from the manufacturing hands is carried to other places: chiefly, either to the county town, or to a thriving, opulent town about seven miles distant: there being no master manufacturer in the place. This last feature is what occasioned my suggestion in a former passage, that provided the manufacturing profits were to be taxed at all proportionably to the poor, it should be by districts of either hundreds or counties. Why I think this ought to be a general regulation, is, because, although the circumstance I am here stating presents itself in the most aggravated possible shape in the township I am describing, yet the evil of manufacturing wealth arising out of places where the accumulators of it do not reside, is not, I believe, at all uncommon. I have from necessity, in consequence of an insolvent tenant quitting his farm, and leaving it in a state of dilapidation, been an involuntary occupier in this township of one hundred and sixty acres of vicarial glebe land: sixty forest land (mostly unimproved), one hundred old inclosure. On this land I have been obliged to build a cottage and several farm buildings. These I will throw out of the account: both the capital employed in them, and its interest. I have farmed this land for five years, not indeed with the benefit of direct personal, but what is next to personal knowlege-with I believe a fair degree of spirited and active, though not expensive, management; and I question whether there is a farmer in the township who, if he were appealed to for his honest opinion, could say otherwise, than it has been as well farmed, and as much improved within the same space of time, as

I use "parish" here as the most familiar term, though the place is a township, as already stated.

any farm in the place. Now let me state the result. For five years, after the most careful and exact account kept of every the minutest produce of the farm, down to every egg and head of poultry, not one farthing of rent has been obtained: in other words, no surplus remains after the expenses of the farm have been paid. That which in the hands of a careless and neglectful, or at least not improving tenant, used to bring in an annual rent of nearly one hundred and forty pounds, now produces no rent. If I were to sell up now, the stock, &c. on the land might pay for perhaps twothirds of the expense of the buildings, and no more.

I

Now then, as a suffering occupier, I can state the effect of the poor laws on this unfortunately-conditioned parish. It is this. For want of capital, and from the effect of seclusion from stimulus to exertion, the land in this place has unquestionably been as little improved as that of any place whatever that could be named in the neighborhood. But the evil is here. The poor have taken off all the spare capital. The land, and the land only (for the rated houses without land hardly deserve to be named as an exception), bears the burden. It has to support a hungry, distressed population, continually liable to sudden irruptions of extraordinary failure of work; and with all it pays, I am confident a great deal of abject poverty is to be met with: I mean, not the effect of wilful indolence. The poor rates are a drag on the little property there is, scattered too as it is through a large number of hands. Now, my firm belief is that if the three measures I have ventured to propose should be put in force, or where necessary be enacted, the poor rates of this township would be lowered at least one-half. Who is there that doubts, if I am correct in this opinion, that a tone and spirit would be given to agriculture by such a relief? The personal history I have related, by no means uncommon I believe in its nature, though probably so in its degree, to clerical owners of land, might well be adduced as a warning to the titheholder, did the present argument require it; and such cases must suggest the hope, that if more inclosures are deemed desirable, commutation of tithe for land may not appear essential to them: for so numerous have cases of this kind been, that it is not fairly to be expected of the titheholder, that he should so far forget what is due to himself and those who succeed him, as to consent to a measure so manifestly injurious. But the object with which I make this statement is simply to show by a strong practical example what a serious load the poor rates inflict on the land; how unequally this load is borne for the interests of the community

I add this last epithet, because the forest land was let to a different person, whose management this expression is meant to describe.

at large; and how, without going the lengths of attempting to remove altogether a system that has taken too deep root to make it desirable that it should be hastily and abruptly eradicated, there are yet several mild remedies that may be beneficially resorted to, to soften its rigor. Others I propose stating in the sequel of this letter. But these are all I would propose in the present connexion.

Before I part with this branch of my subject, I must disclaim all wish to throw anything like a distressing or unequal burden either on commerce or manufacture; but especially on the latter. Because this latter has occasioned the burden, it is not therefore reasonable that the whole burden so occasioned should be thrown on them. No. This would be running into the opposite extreme. Moreover, it is due to the manufacturing interest in particular, though to the commercialal so in a certain degree, to remark, that to the capital employed by them, and thrown into the general store, the country has been very materially indebted for the vigor with which it was enabled to sustain a long and expensive war, out of which England came out glorious, and Europe free. To have aided this splendid result in the manner and degree the manufacturing interest did, is no mean praise. It is praise that ought not to be grudged or withheld. Yet in the midst of these considerations, it must not at the same time be overlooked, that whilst the nation was thus aided, individuals were enriched: the source of their riches became an occasion of immense burdens on the land; and from those burdens they are the last who should claim exemption. In the hour of exigency and distress too, the population created by manufactures fly to agriculture, and almost to agriculture alone, for relief.-Connected with these remarks, a striking specimen of voluntary aid afforded to the distressed manufacturers by the landed interest ought not to be omitted. No one can forget the support given to the distressed manufacturers last year. Of this support though perhaps not very easily discriminated; am I far from correct in saying, that at least three-fifths came from those connected with the soil? If the general or local subscription list were consulted, and the amount of parochial collections in agricultural or manufacturing and commercial parishes compared, I am strongly persuaded this opinion would not appear ill-founded. At any rate, the agricultural interest raised a large part of the whole, in proportion to its means. I have some reason to fear that in the course of this collection there were some symptoms of those who had been enriched by manufactures withholding their support to this voluntary fund: a spirit, or rather want of spirit, which had it been very prevalent, the effect might have

been very unfortunate, in producing a strong revulsion of public feeling very unfavorable to the then existing condition and future interests of the manufacturers. At all events, I repeat once more, the agriculturists were the main contributors: perhaps they were in fact at that time the most able to contribute; and this I urge at once as a proof, how important it is to the whole community to uphold and preserve the solidity of the land. If this interest is destroyed, all is gone.

Having dwelt thus long on the manufacturers, I must say a very few words respecting the commercial interest. I repeat my impression, that commerce has no very powerful tendency to increase the poor rates, as it does not extensively create paupers; but it does increase them in some degree, and perhaps nearly as much as agriculture does. At any rate, it is a vast source of wealth acquired by the intervention of labor. Why then should it be exempt from having a share, and a fit share in what is to be treated in some sense as a national burden-that of the poor? Why should the farmer be left to sink under this weight, whilst the tradesman and merchant holds his head above it? There is no reason in this. There is actually no reason whatever why landed capital should pay more to the poor, than any other capital produced by labor. If there is any particular description of wealth that ought to be most taxed on this head, it is that which perhaps at present most escapes; viz. manufacturing profits. But I only contend for their paying such a share as will be commensurate with their interest in the common stock. This I hold is the least they ought to do,

I have thus brought to a conclusion all that presents itself to my mind connected with the article in your review on "agriculture and rent:" and submitting it to your judgment and that of my rea. der, I pass on to your next article I have enumerated; viz. that entitled "substitution of savings' banks for poor laws."

Most heartily, Sir, do I congratulate the public on the possession of this fruit of liberal, reflecting humanity, and sound, enlightened policy. Would that I may live to see it acted on! If life were granted only for purposes such as these, then would I, having seen this, utter my "Nunc dimittis." I verily believe the plan thus unfolded might in its farther development and ultimate accomplishment, become one of the most valuable legacies of its kind bequeathed by this generation to posterity. Under discreet and general application, I can imagine no plan less open to objection, except amongst those who will object to every thing; or more likely to produce results on all sides beneficial, without serious injury to any. Could this be effected, we might indeed hope to see

a poor population of sound moral health, courage, diligence, and integrity. I beg respectfully, Sir, to follow you through some of your details.

I am pleased with the temper with which you are willing to soften down the word "compulsory." It is an ugly word to an Englishman's ear; but it ought not to sound harsh to a dependent stipendiary poor, if mingled with the cheering tones of genuine independence, and happy, undesponding industry. If however the national feeling will at first be offended by this adjunct, notwithstanding that its proposed application has already the high sanction of those two noble bulwarks of our country, the army and navy," means may be devised to introduce the attempt gradually: till the success of a gradual, should at once reconcile all to the permanent measure: as I am satisfied the experiment, fully and properly made, would do. Not to omit too your own remark, which deserves to be repeated; that a large portion of His Majesty's subjects having already been sufficiently long liable to a compulsory tax for the relief of others, why should not these others now submit to a like tax for the relief and benefit of themselves?-Could I be persuaded that any legislative measure would follow on any of the preceding suggestions, I would submit the propriety of introducing into whatever bill or bills might pass on the subject a provision for giving a trifling bonus to such paupers as made deposits in the savings' banks over and above the required amount, and in proportion to the amount of such addition. It may appear anomalous indeed to propose paying the pauper for saving for himself; but it must be remembered this is only proposed as a means of getting out of an unnatural and diseased state of things: and this tempo. rary measure ought to be very short-lived; not more than three, five, or seven years, on a graduated scale of distress. By that time, it may be hoped, the pauper himself will have begun to feel, how much better it will be to increase these savings by a voluntary effort, and thus eat the bread of independence, than to rely on, if not a scanty pittance, yet at the best a bare subsistence (for this is all compulsory relief ought to supply) through the servile channel of constrained relief.

I am not equal to the task of adjusting the precise measure of approval or disapproval of all you write, either as to the extent to which the compulsory payment should be carried, or the amount of the weekly sum to be put by. Perhaps if my opinions on this subject were of sufficient value to entitle me fully to express them, I should be disposed neither entirely to acquiesce, nor the contrary. A few suggestions, however, I will offer on these particulars.

1 See Quarterly Review, Vol. 36. p. 487.