HB
401
517
The Application of Capital
to Land
ܕ:
by
Sir Edward West
A REPRINT OF ECONOMIC TRACTS
Edited by
JACOB H. HOLLANDER, PH. D.
Associate Professor of Political Economy
Johns Hopkins University
:
A Reprint of Economic Tracts
Edited by
JACOB H. HOLLANDER, PH. D.
Associate Professor of Political Economy
Johns Hopkins University
Sir Edward West
on
The Application of Capital to Land
1815
COPYRIGHTED 1903, BY
THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS
The Lord Baltimore Press
THE FRIEDenwald COMPANY
BALTIMORE, MD., U. S. A.
}
>
''I
n zb
***
redlá z art.
INTRODUCTION
C
A careful student of the history of economic theories has de-
scribed Sir Edward West as "the first, though not the name-father
and greatest of the 'Ricardian' school,"¹ and has added in further
explanation, "It is impossible to read West's pamphlet without
seeing that the form in which the law of diminishing returns '
was subsequently taught, and the phraseology in which it was ex-
pressed, are far more due to him than is imagined by those who
only know him as the subject of a civil reference in Ricardo's
preface.'
19 2
This comparative neglect dates back to West's contemporaries.
"I have read his book with attention, and I find that his views
agree very much with my own," wrote Ricardo to Malthus on
March 9, 1815. In 1817, in the Preface (iv) to the Principles
of Political Economy and Taxation," Ricardo deliberately linked
West with Malthus as having "presented to the world, nearly
at the same moment, the true doctrine of rent." But a year
later (September 18, 1818), his verdict expressed to Hutches
Trower was distinctly vaguer: His pamphlet was ingen-
ious, and he had a glimpse of the true doctrine of rent and
profits." + In Ricardo's subsequent writings, formal and informal,
West is not again referred to. Malthus and James Mill make no
mention of him. Even McCulloch, whose scent for anything
like an 'anticipation' of an accepted doctrine was the keenest,
merely speaks of the rent tracts of West and Malthus as "two
pamphlets of extraordinary merit, published nearly at the same
moment," and then summarily disposes of both by adding, "But
the investigations of these gentlemen, though of great importance,
were comparatively limited in their object." It was only at the
"C
CC
¹ Cannan, "A History of the Theories of Production and Distri-
bution in English Political Economy from 1776 to 1848" (London,
1893), p. 279.
2 Ibid., p. 160.
"Letters of David Ricardo to Thomas Robert Malthus, 1810-
1823 "
(ed. Bonar. Oxford: 1887), p. 63.
4" Letters of David Ricardo to Hutches Trower and others, 1811-
1823" (ed. Bonar and Hollander. Oxford: 1899), p. 58.
CC
" McCulloch, A Discourse on the Rise, Progress, Peculiar Ob-
jects, and Importance of Political Economy: containing an outline
of a course of lectures on the principles and doctrines of that
science (Edinburgh, 1824), p. 65. Cf. also his "The Principles
""
174963
4
INTRODUCTION
hands of ready pamphleteers, like William Jacob and Arthur
Young, that West was accorded a larger place, and this recog-
nition was naturally enough transient.
Within a decade after its appearance, West's pamphlet, pseudo-
nymous and probably of limited circulation, had been virtually
forgotten. Even his Price of Corn and Wages of Labour," &
published in 1826 with its spirited claim to the discovery of other
economic principles then already identified as Ricardian, failed
apparently to receive the slightest attention. Thereafter West's
name, like James Anderson's, appears in economic writing merely
in a crass qualification of the familiar statement that the differ-
ential law of rent was put forth by Malthus and developed and
applied by Ricardo.
"
Bare details of West's personal life have come down to us. He
was born in St. Marylebone, Middlesex, in 1782,10 his family
being well-connected and in part distinguished. He was educated
at Harrow and Oxford, receiving the bachelor's degree in 1804, the
master's title in 1807, and holding a fellowship in University Col-
lege thereafter. He was called to the bar, and in 1817, pub-
lished "A Treatise on Extents." 11 He relinquished academic
of Political Economy: with a sketch of the rise and progress of
the science" (Edinburgh, 1825), p. 265, and "The Literature of
Political Economy" (London, 1845), p. 33.
8 (
A Letter to Samuel Whitbread, Esq. M. P., being a sequel to
Considerations on the Protection required by British Agriculture;
to which are added remarks on the publications of A Fellow of
University College, Oxford; of Mr. Ricardo, and Mr. Torrens
(London, 1815).
"
"An Inquiry into the Rise of Prices in Europe, during the last
twenty-five years, compared with that which has taken place in
England; with observations on the effects of high and low prices "
(London, 1815), published in 'The Pamphleteer (London),
vol. vi, pp. 165-204.
"C
""
866
8" Price of Corn and Wages of Labour, with observations upon
Dr. Smith's, Mr. Ricardo's and Mr. Malthus's doctrines upon those
subjects; and an attempt at an exposition of the causes of the
fluctuation of the price of corn during the last thirty years'
(London, 1826).
'See in particular the memoir in "The Annual Biography and
Obituary: 1830" (London, 1830), the materials for which, we
are told by the editor, "have been derived from a private and
authentic source."
10" Dictionary of National Biography" (ed. Lee), vol. lx, p. 329.
11" A Treatise of the Law and Practice of Extents in Chief and
in Aid. With an appendix of forms of writs; affidavits for ex-
tents; pleadings to extents; rules of court; and table of fees "
(London, 1817).
INTRODUCTION
5
LO
office and active legal practice, in which he had already attained
a considerable measure of success, to accept the office of recorder
of Bombay. He was knighted on July 5, 1822, and upon the
establishment of the supreme court in 1824, was made chief jus-
tice. His two most important public acts were rejection of the
Calcutta regulation for controlling the press, and reformation of
the police of Bombay. He died at Poonah in August, 1828. An
address, signed by a large body of natives and presented to the
surviving judges of the presidency, extols West's personal and
judicial virtues, notably his activity in connection with the admis-
sion of natives to jury service, and refers to a sum of money hav-
ing been subscribed and made over to the Native Education Society
for the establishment of "Chief Justice West's Scholarships and
Prizes."
13
West's interest in political economy was sustained. We are
told that he commenced its study shortly after leaving Oxford and
that "it occupied his attention, more or less, until his death." 12
But with whatever zeal pursued, the study was distinctly an
avocation. In publishing his first pamphlet in 1815, West yielded
to the representations of friends that interest in other pursuits
might perhaps injure his professional career and omitted his
name from the title page. Acquaintance with Brougham, Ricardo
and possibly Malthus, exerted no influence in this direction
and it was not until the appearance of Ricardo's "Protection to
Agriculture" in 1822, that West again attempted formal economic
writing. This manuscript was taken with him to India in nearly
finished form; but delays occurred and when it finally appeared in
1826 as
"Price of Corn and Wages of Labour," the subject had
lost much of its timeliness. West's final and most ambitious
economic work was in preparation at the time of his death. We
know nothing of it beyond what the author of the biographical
memoir, referred to above, has written: "It would, probably, have
amounted to a general treatise on the whole subject, and it had
occupied his mind intensely for the greater part of his leisure,
for more than a year preceding his death. He had received an
offer from one of the most eminent publishers in London, to
undertake the publication of it; and it is to be hoped that, at least,
a large portion of the work has been left in a state which will
admit of its being yet given to the world." It is at least interest-
12 "The Annual Biography and Obituary: 1830" (London,
1830), p. 106.
13" Letters of David Ricardo to Thomas Robert Malthus, 1810-
1823" (ed. Bonar. Oxford: 1887) p. 63.
6
INTRODUCTION
ing to conjecture that had his life been prolonged, or had cir-
cumstances marked out for him a less absorbing career than legal
activity and far-removed judicial office, West's influence upon
the development of English economic thought would have been
considerable.
14
West's first pamphlet, like Malthus's rent tract, owes its formal
publication to the corn-law controversies of 1813-1815. But to
West as to Malthus the essential principle of increasing costs in
agriculture had occurred some years ago," " and we are again
led to the conclusion that the genesis of the law of diminishing
returns is referable to that extraordinary condition of British
agriculture in the preceding decade, the conspicuous features of
which-extension of cultivation and application of capital-were
familiar to all students of economic conditions long before parlia-
mentary blue-books gave them wide publicity."
In the present edition the general appearance of the title page of
the tract has been preserved, the original pagination has been in-
dicated and a few annotations have been appended.
BALTIMORE, June, 1903.
14 See p. 9, below.
15 Cf. Introduction (p. 4) to the reprint of Malthus, "An In-
quiry into the Nature and Progress of Rent, and the principles
by which it is regulated" (ed. Hollander. Baltimore: 1903).
ESSAY
ON THE
APPLICATION OF CAPITAL
TO
LAND,
WITH
OBSERVATIONS
SHEWING THE
IMPOLICY
OF
ANY GREAT RESTRICTION OF THE
IMPORTATION OF CORN,
AND
THAT THE BOUNTY OF 1688 DID NOT LOWER THE
PRICE OF IT.
BY
A FELLOW OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE,
OXFORD.
LONDON:
PRINTED FOR T. UNDERWOOD, 32, FLEET STREET;
By C. Roworth, Bell Yard, Temple Bar.
1815.
ESSAY, &c.
THE chief object of this essay is the publication of a prin-
ciple in political economy, which occurred to me some years
ago; and which appears to me to solve many difficulties in
the science, which I am at a loss otherwise to explain.
On reading lately the reports of the corn committees,¹ I
found my opinion respecting the existence of this principle
confirmed by many of the witnesses, whose evidence is there
detailed. This circumstance and the importance of the
principle to a correct understanding of many parts of the
corn question, have induced me to hazard this publication
before the meeting of parliament, though in a much less per-
fect shape than I think it would have assumed had I been
less limited in point of time. I shall first proceed to prove
this principle, and shall then shew some of the consequences
which flow from it. ||
/ 1
The principle is simply this, that in the progress of the
improvement of cultivation the raising of rude produce
becomes progressively more expensive, or, in other words, the
ratio of the net produce of land to its gross produce is con-
tinually diminishing.
.
By the gross produce I mean, of course, the whole produce
without any reference to the expense of production; by the
net produce, that which remains of the gross produce after
replacing the expense of production.
In the progress of cultivation both the gross produce and
the net produce must be constantly increasing; for addi-
2
10
SIR EDWARD WEST
tional expense or capital would not be laid out on land,
unless it would reproduce not only sufficient to replace the
capital laid out, but also some increase or profit on that capi-
tal, which increase or profit is the net produce. But the
proposition is, that every additional quantity of capital laid
out produces a less proportionate return, and consequently,
the larger the capital expended, the less the ratio of the profit
to that capital. Thus suppose any quantity of land such
that 1007. capital laid out on it would reproduce 1207. that
is 20 per cent. profit, I say that a double capital viz. 2001.
would not reproduce 2401. or 20 per cent. profit, but probably
3 2301. or some less sum than || 2407. The amount of the
profit would no doubt be increased, but the ratio of it to the
capital would be diminished.
It is a fact acknowledged by all writers on political econ-
omy, that in the progress of improvement of any country, the
productive powers of labour in agriculture improve less rap-
idly than the productive powers of labour in manufactures;
or rather to express the same proposition more accurately,
the productive powers of labour in raising rude produce im-
prove less rapidly than the effective powers of labour in
manufacturing it. This phenomenon has hitherto been ac-
counted for solely by the impossibility of carrying the sub-
division of labour, and the consequent introduction of ma-
chinery, so far in agriculture as in manufactures.
nature of agriculture," says the author of the Wealth of
Nations, "does not admit of so many subdivisions of labour,
nor of so complete a separation of one business from another,
as manufactures. It is impossible to separate so entirely the
business of the grazier from that of the corn farmer, as the
trade of the carpenter is commonly separated from that of
the smith. The spinner is almost always a distinct person
from the weaver: but the ploughman, the harrower, the
"The
same.
4 sower of the seed, and the reaper of the || corn, are often the
The occasions for those different sorts of labour re-
turning with the different seasons of the year, it is impossible.
that one man should be constantly employed in any one of
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
11
them. This impossibility of making so complete and entire a
separation of all the different branches of labour employed in
agriculture, is perhaps the reason why the improvement of the
productive powers of labour in this art, does not always keep
pace with their improvement in manufactures. The most opu-
lent nations, indeed, generally excel all their neighbours in
agriculture as well as manufactures; but they are commonly
more distinguished by their superiority in the latter than in
the former. Their lands are in general better cultivated, and
having more labour and expense bestowed upon them, produce
more in proportion to the extent and natural fertility of the
ground. But this superiority of produce is seldom much more
than in proportion to the superiority of labour and expense.
In agriculture, the labour of the rich country is not always
much more productive than that of the poor, or at least, it is
never so much more productive as it commonly is in manufac-
tures. The corn of the rich country, therefore, will not
always, in the same degree of goodness, come cheaper to mar-
ket than that of the poor. || The corn of Poland, in the same 5
degree of goodness, is as cheap as that of France, notwith-
standing the superior opulence and improvement of the latter
country. The corn of France is, in the corn provinces, fully
as good, and in most years nearly about the same price with
the corn of England: though, in opulence and improvement,
France is perhaps inferior to England. The corn lands of
England, however, are better cultivated than those of France,
and the corn lands of France are said to be much better culti-
vated than those of Poland. But though the poor country,
notwithstanding the inferiority of its cultivation, can, in some
measure, rival the rich in the cheapness and goodness of its
corn, it can pretend to no such competition in its manufac-
tures; at least, if those manufactures suit the soil, climate,
and situation of the rich country.” *
The impossibility here stated of increasing so much in agri-
culture as in manufactures by the division of labour, and by
* Smith's Wealth of Nations, Vol. I. B. 1. c. 1. p. 10, 11.2
12
SIR EDWARD WEST
machinery, the quantity of work done by any given number of
hands, would indisputably account for a retardation of the
improvement of the former when compared with the latter.
6 But this, it || is necessary to observe, would account for a
comparative retardation only; for the effects of the subdivision
of labour and the application of machinery are considerable
even in agriculture; and would greatly improve the productive
powers of labour in that art as well as in manufactures, were
it not for another principle, which has escaped the attention of
Dr. Smith, and which has a positive operation in checking the
improvement of those powers in agriculture; which principle
may, according to the degree in which it acts, either merely
retard, or altogether stop, such improvement; or even render
the powers of labour actually less productive as cultivation
advances.
Dr. Smith's principle is, that the quantity of work which
can be done by the same number of hands, increases in the
progress of improvement comparatively less rapidly in agri-
culture than in manufactures. The additional principle to
which I allude is, that each equal additional quantity of work
bestowed on agriculture, yields an actually diminished re-
7 turn,* || and of course if each equal additional quantity of
work yields an actually diminished return, the whole of the
work bestowed on agriculture in the progress of improvement,
yields an actually diminished proportionate return. Whereas
it is obvious that an equal quantity of work will always fabri-
cate the same quantity of manufactures.
Lay aside for a moment the considerations of the subdivision
of labour and machinery, and suppose that each workman
independently could do as much work as each in association.
In such a state of things, such manufactures as were made
*It will be observed that in this reasoning I measure the pro-
ductive powers of labour by the effects produced, and not by the
quantity of work done. Thus a good workman will do more work
than a less skilful one; but if the work of the latter be bestowed
on a grateful soil, it may produce a greater effect than the work
of the former bestowed on an inferior soil.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
13
would be constantly in the progress of improvement, made
with equal labour, and the increase of their quantity (suppos-
ing the price of rude produce to be given,) would be exactly
proportioned to the labour bestowed in fabricating them. A
million of men would make neither more nor less in propor-
tion to their number than one. But would this be the case
in agriculture? Consider the case of a new colony; the first
occupiers have their choice of the land, and of course cultivate
the richest spots in the country: the next comers must take
the second in quality, which will return less to their labour,
and so each successive additional set of cultivators must ne- - 8
cessarily produce less than their predecessors.
Again, look to the history of agriculture, from its first rude
beginning, immediately after the pastoral state when almost
the whole of the produce was still spontaneous, to the state of
perfection at which it has arrived in this country, in which
the mode of culture has approximated to gardening.
In the pastoral state, the only labour of the tribe is that of
tending their cattle and driving them to fresh pastures from
those which they have exhausted; the flocks multiply without
trouble, and are maintained by the spontaneous produce of
the soil. As population advances it is necessary to have re-
course to agriculture; in this state somewhat more labour is
necessary to support even the same number of mouths; but yet
it is at first small if compared with the quantity of produce;
the cultivators till successively the richest spots, which yield
profuse returns to the slight cultivation which is bestowed
upon them; and the cattle which share with man the labours
of the field, wander over immense tracts, fed, as in the pastoral
state, by the spontaneous productions of nature. As each cul-
tivator is driven into a narrower compass by the pressure of
population, he is obliged to till soils which are comparatively || 9
ungrateful and exhausted: the cattle are fed on artificial
grasses; and expensive manures are brought from a distance
to enable the land to yield successive crops, instead of being
left, when exhausted, as in the earlier stages of improvement,
to renovate itself. This mode of proof, however, to render it
14
SIR EDWARD WEST
complete, would require more space than the limits of this
essay would allow, and a greater accumulation of facts than I
can at present collect. I shall therefore attempt a briefer
demonstration of the principle.
The additional work bestowed upon land must be expended
either in bringing fresh land into cultivation, or in cultivat-
ing more highly that already in tillage. In every country
the gradations between the richest land and the poorest, must
be innumerable. The richest land, or that most conveniently
situated for a market, or, in a word, that which, on account
of its situation and quality combined, produces the largest
return to the expense bestowed on it, will of course be cul-
10 tivated first,* and when in the progress of improve- || ment
new land is brought into cultivation, recourse is necessarily
had to poor land, or to that at least which is second in quality
to what is already cultivated. It is clear that the additional
work bestowed in this case will bring a less return than the
work bestowed before. And the very fact that in the progress
of society new land is brought into cultivation, proves that
additional work cannot be bestowed with the same advantage
as before on the old land. For 100 acres of the rich land
will, of course, yield a larger return to the work of 10 men,
than 100 acres of inferior land will do, and if this same rich
land would continue to yield the same proportionate return
to the work of 20 and 30 and 100 as it did to that of 10 labour-
ers, the inferior land would never be cultivated at all. That
this diminution of the return of the soil to the additional
expense bestowed on it takes place gradually, may also be
proved by the same reasoning.
The gradations of the quality of the soil must be infinite.
Suppose any country to contain one million acres of land,
* Many various circumstances, arising chiefly from the artificial
regulations of society, will doubtless interfere to disturb this nat-
ural progress of things; but though they may disturb the oper-
ation of the principle, a very little consideration will show that
they cannot completely counteract it; and that even these dis-
turbances very often compensate each other.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
15
which return 20 per cent. net profit to a certain capital, say
ten million bestowed on it; another million acres which re-
turns but 19 per cent, or suppose a farm containing 10 acres,
which return 20 per cent. net profit to 1007. bestowed on it, || 11
10 acres which return 19 per cent. to the same capital, and
so on, as in the following table.
Acres.
10
10
10
10
Capital.
100
100
100
100
Net Profit.
20
19
18
17, &c.
The 10 acres returning 20 per cent. would be first culti-
vated, and we have proved that the same 10 acres would not
return 20 per cent. on each successive 1007. bestowed on it;
for if it did, as I have shewn, no part of the other land would
ever be cultivated. But should the additional capital be-
stowed on the first 10 acres produce less than 19 per cent.
the capital would not be bestowed on the first 10 acres but
on the second 10 acres. Or, in short, generally, if the best
land already in cultivation would not return so much to the
additional capital as to the capital already bestowed on it, by
any great difference, such additional capital would not be
expended on the best land, but on that next in quality to the
best, and which, from the infinite number of gradations of
the quality of the soil, must be removed at the least possible
distance from the best.
It appears, therefore, that in the progress of || improvement 12
an equal quantity of work extracts from the soil a gradually
diminishing return; and that, therefore, the whole quantity
of work bestowed on land in the progress of improvement,
extracts from the soil a gradually diminishing proportionate
return. But the quantity of work which can be done by a
given number of hands is increased in the progress of im-
provement, by means of the subdivision of labour and machin-
ery even in agriculture. Such increase then of the quantity
of work which can be performed by the same number of
16
SIR EDWARD WEST
hands in agriculture, may either more than compensate, or
just compensate, or fall short of compensating the diminu-
tion of the return of the same quantity of work. In the first
of which cases labour in agriculture would become absolutely
more productive; in the second would remain always equally
productive; in the last would become absolutely less pro-
ductive. Thus say in any given stage of improvement ten
hands will perform the same quantity of work as twenty
would have performed at any given anterior period. Now if
this same quantity of work will extract from the soil in the
later period more than half what it would have extracted in
the earlier, the same number of hands will produce more in
18 the latter than in the former || period; and labour in agricul-
ture will, of course, have become absolutely more productive:
if the same quantity of work will extract just half in the
latter period of what it did in the former, labour will be
equally productive; if less than half it will have become
absolutely less productive. Now that neither of the two first
suppositions can be the fact will be clear from a moment's
consideration. If either of them were the fact, as we know
that labour becomes actually more productive in manufac-
tures, the wealth and stock of the community in the progress
of improvement and population would go on, not only in-
creasing, but increasing in a rapidly accelerated ratio. The
reproduction of the country would not only each year be
larger in amount than in the preceding year, but the ratio of
that reproduction to the capital would each year be greater.
Population would double with more ease in such a country in
twenty-five years than it does in America in the same period;
and an acre of land would, in a subsequent stage of improve-
ment, more easily maintain a thousand, or any number of
labourers, however great, than it could one in a former stage.
But let us, notwithstanding, suppose that the first of these
14 three hypotheses were the || fact, namely, that labour in agri-
culture becomes in the progress of improvement absolutely
more productive; and let us consider more minutely what
would be the immediate consequence of such a state of things,
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
17
←
and as labour in manufactures we have already seen, becomes
in the progress of improvement more productive, let us sup-
pose the effective powers of labour in all employments, both
in raising rude produce and in manufacturing it to be
doubled. It is obvious that the profits of stock would, in this
case, be doubled; even allowing the wages of labour to be
doubled at the same time; for by the productive powers of
labour being doubled the net produce of labour would be
doubled as well as the gross produce. There would be just
twice as much of every article both of rude produce and
manufactures as before. And, though no article would ex-
change for more of any other than before, yet, as every
person in the community would have twice as much of the
particular article in which he might deal, his command over
every article would be doubled. If there were only the same
quantity of money in the country as before, things would fall
to half their money price, and neither the money profits of
stock nor the money wages of labour would at first be in-
creased, but by the favourable exchange, which such increased 15
cheapness of commodities would produce, bullion would be
imported till there were money enough to circulate the in-
creased quantity of articles, and the wages of labour, and
profits of stock, would then be increased in their money value
as well as their real value.
But next let us suppose a case in which the powers of
labour remain equally productive in agriculture, having be-
come doubly effective in manufactures. Every article of
manufactures is now reduced one-half in price compared with
rude produce, but bears the same ratio towards all the rest
of manufactures as before, and consequently exchanges for
neither more nor less of such manufactures than before. But
every manufacturing capitalist having doubled the production
of the particular article in which he deals, has double the
command over all manufactures, and the same command
over rude produce that he had before. His real profit is
therefore increased. The agriculturist has also double the
command of all manufactures that he had before, and the
18
SIR EDWARD WEST
16
same command of rude produce. The real profits therefore
of all capital are increased, and this would be followed as
before by an increase in the money profits.
The same reasoning would apply of course || to the above
cases, if the effective powers of labour were increased in any
less degree than I have supposed, though the increase of profit
would not of course be so great. The difference would be
merely in degree, not in principle. It follows therefore that
if the powers of labour in agriculture were either to advance
or remain stationary, the profits of stock must constantly rise
in the progress of improvement.
But suppose thirdly, that the productive powers of labour
decrease in agriculture, whilst they increase in manufactures;
and say the habits and wants of the society and the powers.
of labour are such, that half of the capital of the country is
employed in agriculture and half in manufactures.
And first suppose that whilst the powers of labour double
in manufactures, those powers become less productive by half
in agriculture:-the manufacturing capitalist would now
have double the command that he had before over manufac-
tures; but only half the command that he had before over
rude produce: and therefore on the whole he would have no
additional command over the aggregate of commodities, and
his profit would remain the same as before. The same would
be the case also with the agriculturist. If this supposition
17 then were the fact, the profits of stock would always con-
tinue the same in the progress of improvement.
And without tracing the same process again, it is evident
that if the decrease of the powers of labour in agriculture
should be greater than the increase of those powers in manu-
factures, the profits of stock must diminish. But to consider
the case of a diminution of the powers of labour in agricul-
ture, accompanying an increase of those powers in manufac-
tures in a different light:-Suppose that the habits and wants
of the people of any country are such in any given state of
the productive powers of labour, that half their capital is
employed in agriculture and half in manufactures. Suppose
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
19
then that in the progress of improvement the capital in manu-
factures becomes more productive, the capital in agriculture
less so. If the capital which can now be spared from manu-
factures on account of the increase of the effective powers in
them, will raise as much rude produce as to compensate for
the diminution of the productive powers in agriculture, the
profits of the stock of the society will remain the same as
before. But if the spare manufacturing capital will not
compensate the defective powers of production in agriculture,
the profits of the stock of the society must diminish. But
which of these conclusions is || really the fact? Do the profits 18
of stock increase, remain stationary, or decrease in the
progress of improvement?
It is an acknowledged fact that the profits of stock are
always lower in a rich than in a poor country; and that they
gradually fall as a nation becomes more wealthy. This is
evidenced as well by our own history as by that of every other
country, in which the state and progress of commercial capi-
tal have been observed.-(See Wealth of Nations, Book I.
c. 9.) It follows therefore that labour cannot be always
equally productive in agriculture in the progress of improve-
ment; and, a fortiori, that the productive powers of labour
cannot increase, but that they must become gradually less
productive in the progress of improvement. And not only
less productive, but so much less productive that the con-
tinual increase of the effective powers of labour in manufac-
tures does not compensate for their continued diminution in
agriculture. For if it were not so, the profits of stock would,
as I have just proved, become continually higher in the
progress of improvement. In the above argument I have
supposed the wages of labour to vary with the productive
powers of that labour; that is, that the more labour produces
the better it will be paid. That this is nearly the || case, I 19
shall prove presently; but it will be sufficient for the present
to shew that it is impossible wholly to account for the pro-
gressive diminution of the profits of stock by any increase of
the wages of labour. And for this purpose I shall briefly
:
20
SIR EDWARD WEST
recapitulate the above argument. It is a known fact, as I
have stated, that the profits of stock diminish in the progress
of wealth and improvement, but the profits of stock are the
net reproduction of stock, which can be diminished in two
ways only, namely, either by a diminution of the powers of
production, or by an increase of the expense of maintaining
those powers, that is, by an increase of the real wages of
labour. That the real wages of labour cannot increase so as to
account for this diminution of the net reproduction, is clear
from this, that if it were so, the real wages of labour would be
constantly and greatly increasing in the progress of wealth and
improvement; and population would consequently increase
more and more rapidly in the progress of improvement, the
contrary of which we know to be the fact.
As therefore the diminution of the net reproduction is not
wholly, at least, caused by the increasing wages of labour,
that is, the expence of maintaining the productive powers; it
20 must be caused partly, at least, by a dimi- || nution of those
powers. But the productive powers in manufactures, as has
been shewn, are constantly increasing, and the diminution of
the net reproduction or the profits of stock must therefore
necessarily be caused by a diminution of the productive pow-
ers in agriculture. But though it appears to me to be self-
evident that the profits of stock or the net reproduction of
stock cannot be diminished by any other means than the two
I have mentioned, namely, an increased expence of maintain-
ing the productive powers, and a diminution of those powers,
yet it may be right to notice that Dr. Smith has attributed
the fact of the gradual diminution of the profits of stock to
a very different cause.
"The increase," says Dr. Smith, "of stock which raises
wages tends to lower profit. When the stocks of many rich
merchants are turned into the same trade, their mutual com-
petition naturally tends to lower its profit, and when there is
a like increase of stock in all the different trades carried on
in the same society, the same competition must produce the
same effect in them all." Book I. c. viii.³ p. 133.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
21
Smith therefore attributes this decline in the rate of profit
to increased competition. But the slightest consideration
will detect the fallacy of this opinion. If the capital em-
ployed || in one branch of trade alone be increased, doubtless 21
the increased competition of the dealers in that branch will
lower the price of their articles, and consequently the profits
of those dealers. But why is the price lowered except because
that article is now more abundant than others, and could not
be sold without such diminution of price. But if the capital
in all the different branches of trade, and consequently the
quantity of all the articles of those respective trades be in-
creased in the same degree, the same ratio between each and
all the rest remains, and each article must sell for the same
real price as it fetched before. If the competition be in-
creased in any one article, it for the same reason is increased
in all; and as it exists in the same degree in each, it cannot
alter the real price of any one. It is only the relative altera-
tion of the demand and supply which can increase the price,
and here there is no such alteration.
The money price of all articles would no doubt be dimin-
ished, and therefore the money-profits of stock; but this
would not lower the real price of those articles, nor the real
profits; even the money price would soon be raised to a level
with the real price, by a favourable balance of trade and the
consequent introduction of bullion. Still, however, it may
be said as || before, that such competition may lower the profits 22
by an increased demand for workmen, and a consequent rise
of wages.
We return then to the old question, whether the diminution
of the profits of stock in the progress of improvement can be
caused by the increase of the wages of labour. Now, 1st, If
such were the fact, how comes it that both the wages of labour
and profits of stock are high at the same moment in America.
The wages of labour being higher in America than in this
country, if the rise of the wages of labour were the only rea-
son of the diminution of the profits of stock, the profits of
22
SIR EDWARD WEST
stock in America should be lower than they are here. But
we know that they are much higher.
To enter a little more particularly into the subject of the
wages of labour, they, like the price of every thing else, must
depend on the supply and demand. The supply of course
depends on the amount of the population; the demand de-
pends, as Dr. Smith states, on the amount of the stock of the
23 country.* If then || the stock increase faster than the popu-
lation, the demand increases faster than the supply, and
wages must rise; if the stock and population increase equally,
wages will remain stationary; and if population increase
more rapidly than the stock, wages must fall.
It is not the amount then of the stock of a country which
causes high wages; for if the stock of a country be station-
ary, whatever be its amount, population will soon increase up
to the most scanty subsistence which such stock can afford.
Other circumstances beside the amount of stock may, no
doubt, influence the wages of labour; but I am now consider-
ing merely what effect the quantity of stock may have on the
wages of labour; and other circumstances must of course be
excluded from consideration, or taken in mathematical lan-
guage to be given.
Nor is it the greatness of the increase alone of stock which
causes high wages, but it is the greatness of the ratio of the
increase.
Thus suppose a country with 100 millions increasing its
stock annually to the amount of a million, the increase would
be as 1 to 100; and the increase of the wages of labour would
24 be but
"l
* The demand of those who live by wages necessarily increases
with the increase of the revenue and stock of every country, and
cannot possibly increase without it. The increase of revenue and
stock is the increase of national wealth. The demand for those
who live by wages therefore naturally increases with the in-
crease of national wealth, and cannot possibly increase without
it. B. 1. c. 8.
† W. of Nations, B. 1. c. 8.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
23
But suppose a country with stock amounting to 10 millions,
and an annual increase of half a million, though the actual
increase of stock would be smaller than in the last case, the
increase in the wages of labour would be a half-tenth or one-
twentieth. But it must be observed, that supposing a coun-
try to be always equally parsimonious, it is upon the rate of
profit that the rate of the increase of its stock depends: for
the profits of stock are, as I have before mentioned, the net
reproduction of stock, and the greater therefore the profits
of stock, if the country be equally parsimonious, the greater
the rate of the increase of stock.
And it follows that in such a country the greater the profits
of stock, the higher will be the wages of labour, and vice versa.
That the demand for labour would be greatest when most
could be made of it, that is, when the profits of stock were high,
and least when those profits were low, appears too plain to
have required proving, and I should not have dwelt on this
subject had not Dr. Smith, in spite of his clear statement of
the subject of wages in the 8th chapter, seemed to maintain
an opposite opinion. "The rise and fall in the profits of
stock," says Dr. Smith, "depend on the same causes with the
rise and fall in the wages of labour, the increasing or || de- 25
clining state of the wealth of the society, but those causes
effect the one and the other very differently. The increase of
stock which raises wages tends to lower profit."-Book I.
c. 9. p. 133. Dr. Smith seems therefore, here to think that
the profits of stock and wages of labour vary inversely as each
other, the contrary of which I think I have proved to be the
fact.
I will now recapitulate shortly the whole of the above argu-
ments.
The division of labour and application of machinery render
labour more and more productive in manufactures, in the
progress of improvement; the same causes tend also to make
labour more and more productive in agriculture in the pro-
gress of improvement. But another cause, namely, the neces-
sity of having recourse to land inferior to that already in
24
SIR EDWARD WEST
26
tillage, or of cultivating the same land more expensively,
tends to make labour in agriculture less productive in the
progress of improvement. And the latter cause more than
counteracts the effects of machinery and the division of labour
in agriculture; because, otherwise agricultural labour would
either become more productive, or remain equally productive,
in the progress of improvement.
In either of which cases, since labour in || manufactures
becomes more productive, all labour would become more pro-
ductive, and the profits of stock, which are the net reproduc-
tion, would, of course, rise in the progress of improvement.
But the profits of stock are known to fall in the progress of
improvement, and, therefore, neither of the two first suppo-
sitions is the fact, and labour in agriculture must, in the
progress of improvement, become actually less productive. It
is then shewn that this effect cannot be produced by a rise in
the real wages of labour.
The powers of labour therefore, in agriculture, becoming
less productive, and the diminished expense of maintaining
those powers not compensating such decreased productiveness,
which appears from the progressive fall of the profits of stock,
the whole produce of land, and consequently the net produce,
must diminish in proportion to the expense of production;
and the ratio of the net produce to the gross must diminish
in the progress of improvement.
I have endeavoured, therefore, to prove the principle which
it was my object to prove theoretically, and to account for it
as I proceeded in the proof. But I need not this reasoning
for the purpose of substantiating the fact, that the ratio of
27 the net produce to the || gross produce of land gradually
diminishes in the progress of improvement.
Smith has stated, and certainly correctly, that the natural
rent of land is always that part of the net produce of land
which remains after payment of the common profits of stock
on the tenant's capital.-Book I. c. 11. p. 223.
If then the ratio of the rent of land to the tenant's capital
be gradually diminishing in the progress of improvement, the
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
25
profits of stock remaining the same, the ratio of the net pro-
duce to the capital, and consequently to the gross produce of
land, must also be gradually diminishing in the progress of
improvement. A fortiori must this follow, if, as it has been
stated, the profits of stock also gradually diminish in the
progress of improvement.
.
Now it is a commonly observed fact, and one which appears
in almost every page of the Reports of the corn committees,
that the ratio of the rent to the gross produce is much less
at the present moment in this country than it was twenty
years ago, that where twenty years ago rent was one-third of
the gross produce, it is now one-fifth, or between one-fourth
and one-fifth. This, it may be said, is attributable to the
increased burthens on the land, to the poor rates and taxes.
It is certainly possible || that this may have had some effect 28
in producing this alteration of ratio between the rent and
gross produce. However be this as it may, the witnesses who
speak to this fact of the ratio of the rent to the gross produce
having declined, attribute it expressly to the more expensive
mode of cultivation now adopted in order to increase the
produce, and not to the taxes or rates. Thus in p. 41, of the
Lords' Report, the witness says, that, "where estates are in a
very high cultivation, the share of the gross produce obtained
as rent by the landlord is less than where estates are more
imperfectly cultivated." And this is the language of *all
the witnesses before the corn committees; they are unani-
mous in their opinion that where lands are in a high state of
cultivation the rent bears a less ratio to the gross produce
than where they are less expensively tilled.
Dr. Smith seems in one passage to have been aware of this
fact of the diminution of the ratio of the rent to the gross
produce in the progress of improvement.
"In the present state of Europe," says he, "the share of
* See p. 41. 57. 63. 94. 103. 130 of the Lords' Reports.—In p. 44.
79. 92. 99. 111. 121. 133. 154. 203 of the Commons' Reports, A. D.
1814.5
:
26
SIR EDWARD WEST
29 the landlord seldom exceeds a || third, sometimes not a
fourth part of the whole produce of the land. The rent of
land, however, in all the improved parts of the country has
been tripled and quadrupled since those ancient times, and
this third or fourth part of the annual produce is, it seems,
three or four times greater than the whole had been before.
In the progress of improvement, rent, though it increases
in proportion to the extent, diminishes in proportion to the
produce of the land." (See Smith, vol. ii. p. 8. b. 2. c. 3.)
It is singular that after this distinct enunciation of the
fact of the diminution of the rent in proportion to the gross
produce, that the author of the Wealth of Nations should
not only not have seen the conclusion to which this leads by
a mere arithmetical operation, viz. that of the diminution of
the net produce of land to the gross produce, but that in
other parts of his work he should even lose sight of this fact
of the diminution of the ratio of the rent to the gross produce
of land. "The extension of improvement and cultivation,"
says Dr. Smith in one passage, "tends to raise rent directly.
The landlord's share of the produce necessarily increases
with the increase of the produce. That rise in the real price
30 of those parts of the rude produce of land, which is || first
the effect of extended improvement and cultivation, and
afterwards the cause of their being still further extended;
the rise in the price of cattle, for example, tends too to raise
the rent of land directly, and in a still greater proportion.
The real value of the landlord's share, his real command of
the labour of other people, not only rises with the real value
of the produce, but the proportion of his share to the whole
produce rises with it." (Smith, vol. i. p. 392. b. 1. c. 11.)
And the 11th chapter of the first book abounds with pas-
sages in which the fact that the ratio of the rent of land to
the gross produce diminishes in the progress of improvement,
is overlooked.
I have, therefore, attempted to prove as well theoretically
as by the evidence of practical men, that the ratio of the net
produce of land to its gross produce diminishes in the progress
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
27
of improvement. I could adduce a variety of facts in cor-
roboration of my proof had I leisure to go into them. There
is one, however, which seems to me so unequivocal a test of
my principle, that I shall just mention without entering into
the discussion of it. It is the progressive rise of the value of
tithes as compared with rent.
||
I shall now apply this principle to a consideration of the
question of the policy of restricting, or totally prohibiting, in
the present circumstances of this country, the importation of
foreign corn; and shall first briefly sketch some of the con-
sequences of such restriction or total prohibition, and then
point out a few of the probable effects of a free importation.
One of the consequences of a total prohibition of importation
would be that the average price of corn would presently rise
to its growing, or natural price, supposing corn to be now
below that price, and afterwards the average price would
progressively increase, and the nearer any restriction ap-
proaches to prohibition, the more nearly will the effect of
such restriction resemble that of a total prohibition. Take
90s. the quarter to be the growing price in this country of a
crop of wheat sufficient for our present population, if impor-
tation were totally prohibited the average price of wheat
would presently rise to 90s. the quarter. So if by any system
of regulations the importation of foreign wheat were directly
or virtually prohibited, till wheat in our own market had
reached the price of 80s. the quarter, the average price of
wheat would presently rise to 80s.; and 80s. would be the
minimum of price at which wheat could be sold in our mar-
ket, for any continuance. ||
-
The following reasons induce me to think that 90s. the
quarter may be about the growing price of a crop of wheat
raised at home, sufficient for our present supply. It appears
from the documents given in the reports of the corn commit-
tees, that in the years 1811 and 1812 our home growth was
about adequate to our consumption.
31
32
28
SIR EDWARD WEST
According to Sir H. Parnell's statement, which I have
compared with these documents, and believe to be accurate,
"the value of corn exported in 1811 from the united king-
dom to foreign countries, was 1,379,7147.-The value of for-
eign corn imported was 1,092,8047. leaving a balance of ex-
ported corn of 286,9107. In 1812 the value of corn exported
from the united kingdom to foreign countries was 1,498,2297.:
the value of foreign corn imported was 1,213,8507. leaving a
balance of exported corn of 284,3791. In consequence of the
fire at the Custom-House the value of corn exported from
Great Britain in 1813 to foreign countries cannot be ascer-
tained." In the years 1811 and 1812, therefore, we grew
rather more corn than sufficient for our own supply; but
when it is considered that from Ireland alone, grain to the
33 value of 598,3257. in 1811, and to the || value of 662,8237. in
1812, was exported to Spain and Portugal, a great portion
of which was of course for the maintenance of our own troops,
who must now be fed at home, it will be fair, perhaps, to con-
sider that in those years we about supported our population.
""*
It appears from the same documents that the actual price
of wheat in the year 1811 was 94s. 6d. the quarter; in 1812,
125s. 5d.t
The actual price is not of course a sure criterion of the
growing price, unless it be taken on an average of some
length. But considering that the price of wheat in this
country was in
1810
1811
1812
and in 1813
·
s. d.
106 0 the quarter.
94 6
125 5
120 0
though we make every allowance for the extension of the
present improved system of husbandry into Ireland, and
* P. 12 of Sir H. Parnell's pamphlet."
† See 1st Commons Reports, App. No. 1, p. 28. The Windsor
prices of the four first years are higher than those above stated.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
29
those parts of this country into which it has not yet penetrated,
it is impossible to take the growing price of a crop of wheat
sufficient for our own supply at less than 90s. the quarter, in
the present state || of the currency. And of course it cannot 34
fall permanently below its growing price, for otherwise it
would not remunerate the grower, and the same quantity
would not continue to be produced. But to make provision
for an increasing population, it will be necessary to increase
the produce, and this increased produce will, as I have shown,
be raised at a greater proportionate expense; or in other
words, the growing price will progressively increase. Such
would be the consequence of a total prohibition of importa-
tion; and the same reasoning proves that if the importation
of foreign wheat were permitted only whilst our own wheat
were above for instance 80s. the quarter, the average price
of wheat in our markets would never fall below 80s. the quar-
ter. For it is the competition of the foreigner alone which
could keep down wheat even to 80s. and when that compe-
tition were withdrawn, as it must be as soon as the price fell
below 80s. our price would again rise as far as that compe-
tition would permit, viz. to 80s. the quarter.
But it has been denied that the price of corn would rise
were importation prohibited.
(C
.
Sir Henry Parnell (in p. 12 of his pamphlet) says, the
effect of the war, but more particularly of the Berlin and
Milan Decrees, and of our own Orders in Council, has been
to im- || pose such restrictions on the importation of foreign 35
corn during the last five years, as had the direct operation of
an act of parliament imposing very high duties on that trade,
by giving the British farmer the full benefit of nearly the
whole demand of the British market. In the first place a
very high price; in the next place a very great increased
production of corn; and in the last place a very great fall in
the price of it."
And from this he argues (p. 43) "that in the next year,
as the farmer will have the full benefit of the whole of the
demand for our consumption, he will probably grow as much
30
SIR EDWARD WEST
as he has grown of late years; and, therefore, if the crop is
a good one, the price will keep as low as it now is. In the
following years, the certainty of a steady market will lead
to a superfluous supply, and then the price will still be lower.
It will thus become gradually lower and lower until it shall
be on a level with the rest of Europe; and that we shall be
able to secure permanently a superfluous growth of corn, by
being able to export it, and sell it as cheap as foreign corn
can be sold in the foreign market."
Now I deny that there has been any fall in the price of
36 corn, as stated by Sir H. Parnell. ||
•
In 1808 the average price of wheat was 79 0
1809...
1810.
1811.
1812..
95 7
..106 2
94 6
125 5
In 1813.....
•
s. d. per Qr.
•
120 O
App. No. 1 of Com-
mons 1st Report, p. 28.
f
Windsor prices, App.
of Lords Rep. No. 12,
p. 327.
How this can be called a fall in price, much less a very
great fall, I am at a loss to conceive, even allowing for any
possible additional depreciation of our currency.
It is true that Sir H. Parnell states, "that the price of
wheat (p. 42) for the average of the twelve maritime dis-
tricts of England and Wales the week ending the 21st of
May, 1814, was 67s. 11d. If this price is in any degree a
price that has been regulated by the importation of foreign
wheat, to that degree the bill for restraining importation
would advance it. But this price is a price settled by the
quantity of our own wheat in the market, and on hand in the
country; and therefore, the bill cannot advance it. The fact
is, the abundance of our own corn alone has brought down
the price to its present level; and this is so great, that there
is every reason to suppose that it will fall still lower, even if
37 the bill shall become a law." ||
Now how can it possibly be proved or known for a fact,
that the abundance of our own corn alone has brought down
the price to the level mentioned by Sir H. Parnell?
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
31
On the contrary is it not notorious that the expectations
of importation, if not actual importation, had at that time
considerably reduced the price of wheat?
The witness in p. 26 of the last Commons Rep. thus
answers questions put to him.
Question." Do you not conceive that the present low
price of grain is wholly occasioned by the abundant crop of
last harvest, and not in consequence of any expectation of
foreign import?"-" Certainly not; it is the alarm of the
importation from abroad."
"Are you aware of any large importation of foreign corn?"
"There is an expectation of it."
"Are you aware whether any foreign corn has been im-
ported?"—"No; I do not allude to any particular quantity
lately imported; but the farmers are very much alarmed, and
of course bring every bushel to market."
With respect to Sir H. Parnell's opinion that corn will
become lower and lower, it is good for nothing, unless he
can show that the expenses of cultivation will fall, as of
course the || actual price cannot permanently fall unless the 38
growing or natural price fall.
That rude produce does rise in price in the progress of im-
provement, experience as well as theory demonstrates. That
this rise too in the price of rude produce is followed by a
rise in the wages of labour, and communicates itself, more
or less to all manufactures, chiefly of course to those in which
rude produce predominates most, and in a less degree to
those manufactures of a finer kind in which rude produce
bears but a small proportion to the skill of the artist, is also
evident. 1st, Looking to our own country, corn has been
constantly rising in price since the middle of the last cen-
tury. This phenomenon of the rise in the price of corn has
been constantly observed in all improving countries. 2dly,
England in an early stage of improvement exported corn in
exchange for manufactures, as Poland and America do at the
present moment. Our wealth and population increased, and
as far as the circumstances of Europe and our own laws per-
32
SIR EDWARD WEST
mitted, we imported corn in exchange for our manufactures;
so did Holland and Genoa in the time of their wealth. Such
is the course in which improving nations seem destined to
move. They begin by exporting rude produce for manufac-
39 tures; as they grow more wealthy they export less corn,
and fabricate more manufactures at home; in a further stage
they export manufactures only, and receive rude produce in
return from nations less advanced than themselves, and
these manufactures gradually change in kind, containing less
and less of rude material, and more and more of manufac-
turing skill. The price of every thing increases rapidly, and
the profits of stock fall so low, as I have shown they must do,
from the enhanced price of rude produce, that at last even
the capital of the merchant, and next of the manufacturer,
seeks a more grateful soil.
It is not a little singular that this rise of the real price of
corn in the progress of improvement has escaped the atten-
tion of the author of the Wealth of Nations, though he ex-
pressly states, "that all other sorts of rude produce, except
corn and such other vegetables as are raised altogether by
human industry, naturally grow dearer as the society advances
in wealth and improvement." B. 1. c. 11. p. 339. In an-
other passage he says, "In every state of society, in every
stage of improvement, corn is the production of human in-
dustry. But the average product of every sort of industry is
always suited more or less exactly to the average consump-
tion: the average supply to the average demand. In every
40 different stage of im- || provement, besides, the raising of
equal quantities of corn in the same soil and climate, will, at
an average, require nearly equal quantities of labour; or,
what comes to the same thing, the price of nearly equal quan-
tities; the continual increase of the productive powers of
labour in an improved state of cultivation, being more or
less counterbalanced by the continual increasing price of
cattle, the principal instruments of agriculture. Upon all
these accounts, therefore, we may rest assured, that equal
quantities of corn will, in every state of society, in every stage
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
33
of improvement, more nearly represent, or be equivalent to,
equal quantities of labour, than equal quantities of any other
part of the rude produce of land." B. 1. c. 11. p. 292. and see
B. 1. c. 11. p. 382.
Dr. Smith takes notice of what he seems to think a vulgar
error, that the price of corn is always lower in a poor coun-
try than in a rich.
"The greater part of the writers who have collected the
money prices of things in ancient times, seem to have consid-
ered the low money price of corn, and of goods in general, or,
in other words, the high value of gold and silver, as a proof,
not only of the scarcity of those metals, but of the poverty
and barbarism of the country at the time when it took
place, &c." B. 1. c. 11. p. 375. But in this same passage || 41
he allows that the low money price of cattle, poultry, &c. is
a proof of the poverty of a country. Mr. Hume takes notice
of the fact of the increase of the price of provisions and
labour, in an improving country, and assigns a very insuffi-
cient reason for it, viz. the increase of the quantity of money.
“There seems to be a happy concurrence of causes in hu-
man affairs, which check the growth of trade and riches, and
hinder them from being confined intirely to one people, as
might naturally at first be dreaded from the advantages of
an established commerce.-Where one nation has got the start
of another in trade, 'tis very difficult for the latter to regain
the ground it has lost, because of the superior industry and
skill of the former, and the greater stocks of which its mer-
chants are possessed, and which enable them to trade for so
much smaller profits. But these advantages are compen-
sated, in some measure, by the low price of labour in every
nation which has not an extensive commerce, and does not
very much abound in gold and silver. Manufactures, there-
fore, gradually shift their places, leaving those countries and
provinces which they have already enriched, and flying to
others, whither they are allured by the cheapness of pro-
visions and labour, till they have || enriched these also, and 42
are again banished by the same causes. And, in general, we
;
34
SIR EDWARD WEST
may observe, that the dearness of every thing, from plenty
of money, is a disadvantage which attends an established
commerce, and sets bounds to it in every country, by enabling
the poorer states to undersell the richer in all foreign mar-
kets." (Hume, vol. 1. Part 2. Essay 3. pp. 312 and 313.)*
The only means of retarding this necessary progress of
things is by importing rude produce from countries where
we can buy it cheaper than we can grow it at home.
By such means we might, to a very great degree, unite the
advantages of a fresh country, and of one highly improved.
By these means we might purchase our rude produce cheap,
and manufacture it cheap; but if we refuse to import our
rude produce, we must daily approximate to that state which
Hume has so strongly described. Great question has been
made of the truth of the fact, which is noticed by Dr. Smith,
that any rise in the price of corn communicates itself to every
other commodity. It is immaterial here to enter into the
question whether Dr. Smith meant real or nominal price.
The rise in the real price of any thing which immediately
43 and fully communicates itself to every other article || seems,
indeed, a contradiction in terms; because the real price of
any article is its value in exchange for every other but if
the rise in price of any one be immediately and fully com-
municated to every other, the rise is merely nominal, as that
article can now purchase no more of any other article than
before. It is sufficient for my present purpose, if it be true,
that by any increase of expense in obtaining rude produce
the whole wealth and comfort of the community is dimin-
ished, the command of each individual over all the neces-
saries and luxuries, both domestic and foreign, lessened.*
That such must be the consequence of the increasing expense
:
*If all the commodities in a society, except money, were di-
minished equal proportion, the real price, i. e. their value in
exchange for each other would remain the same.
If the money
were diminished in the same proportion, their nominal price
would also remain the same, yet in each case it is obvious that
a large portion of wealth would be lost to the society.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
35
of raising rude produce is obvious to the slightest considera-
tion. The larger the capital required to raise the rude pro-
duce of a country, the less in proportion can, of course, be
spared for its manufactures.
66
Throughout the whole world the number of manufac-
tures, of proprietors, and of persons || engaged in the various 44
civil and military professions must be exactly proportioned
to the surplus or net produce of the earth, and cannot in the
nature of things increase beyond it. If the earth had been
so niggardly of her produce as to oblige all her inhabitants
to labour for it, no manufacturers or idle persons could ever
have existed." Malthus, b. 3. c. 8. p. 309. Suppose a coun-
try insulated from all others and containing one million in-
habitants, the soil of which is such that half the number are
sufficient to raise food for the whole; and suppose the other
half to be employed in fabricating manufactures for them-
selves and for the agricultural labourers. Suppose now that
this million of inhabitants increases to two million; if from
the increased difficulty of raising food for the two million
inhabitants it becomes necessary to employ two-thirds of
them in providing subsistence for the whole, there is now
but one-third of the whole left to administer to the other
wants of the society, and if the effective powers of labour in
manufactures be not increased, and that in a degree sufficient
to compensate for the greater proportion of the labour of the
whole community which is now required for agriculture, the
revenue and comforts of the whole community must be
diminished. But suppose now this country to || open a com- 45
munication with a neighbouring country which had not car-
ried its skill in manufactures so far, but grew its corn much
cheaper, so that the former, by turning a part of her hands
from agriculture to manufactures, could make as many man-
ufactures as would purchase twice as much corn from the
new country as those hands had before raised. The conse-
quence would, of course be, that the former country could
draw another portion of her hands from agriculture to man-
36
SIR EDWARD WEST
ufacture for herself, and the real wealth of the whole com-
munity would be increased.
I come now to the consideration of some of the conse-
quences of a free importation of foreign corn; and, first I
shall consider its effects upon our own agriculture; and I will
assume that the growing price of foreign wheat is such that
it can be imported into this country and sold in our markets
at a price as low even as 45s. the quarter, in the present state
of the currency. Taking, as I have before done, the present
growing price of our wheat to be 90s. the quarter, it would
appear to be impossible for our farmers to bear this unequal
competition.
It would appear to cursory observation that the whole of
our agriculture would, in time, be superseded. And such
46 would inevitably be the case if our expenses of cultivation
11
should not diminish as our growth diminished, nor the ex-
penses of foreign growth increase as their produce increased.
The constant difference of 45s. the quarter would necessarily
induce the foreigner to increase his growth, and compel the
home grower to diminish his, till the former had completely
expelled the latter from the market.
But there are limits to this dependance of any country on
foreigners for an article of the first necessity; and these
limits are to be found in the principle which I have stated.
That principle will shew that in such case, as the growth of
the foreigner increased the proportionate expense of his
growth would increase,* and as the home growth was dimin-
ished, the proportionate expense of the home growth would
also be diminished, since a larger growth is raised in any
given country, at a larger proportionate expense than a
smaller growth. Say that the first year of importation we
import half a million quarters; the next year the foreign
* It is indifferent for the present purpose whether this increase
of the price of the foreign supply would proceed, as it partly
would, from an increased expense of growth, or as it would also
partly from the necessity of drawing it from more distant regions.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
37
.
grower, in order to meet the || increased demand for foreign 47
corn, will increase his growth, say half a million quarters,
and the foreign growing price will rise, say from 45 to 50s.
the quarter. The home grower will diminish his growth
half a million quarters, and the home growing price will fall,
say from 90 to 80s. the quarter. The actual price of both
in the market must meet and be at some point between 50
and 80s. say at 65s. This price is still such as to induce the
foreigner to increase his cultivation, and the home grower to
diminish his. In consequence the foreigner's growing price
will be still further increased, and the home grower's still
more diminished, say to 60s. the quarter, and say that the
actual price in our market falls to 60s. Both the home
grower and the foreigner are now just paid the natural price
of their produce, and there is no longer any motive to the
one to increase his cultivation, nor to the other to diminish
his. I have not pretended here to approximate to the de-
grees in which the prices would rise and fall, nor to the point
at which the growing prices of home wheat and foreign wheat
would meet. The process would be slower, and therefore
less violent than I have supposed. All I mean to assert is,
that the growing price of the former would fall, and the
growing price of the latter rise, till they met || at some point 48
between the original prices of each. This point would, of
course, be much nearer the present growing price of the for-
eign than of the domestic growth, as the effect of the impor-
tation divided among many foreign markets would be less to
each than the effect of the importation operating on our
single market. It is remarkable how differently the circum-
stance of a similar disparity of price would affect manufac-
tures. Suppose the foreigner could manufacture broad cloth
and sell it in our market at half the price at which we could
afford to sell it; the home manufacturer, as in agriculture,
would immediately diminish his manufacture, the foreigner
would increase his; but the more the home manufacturer
diminished his manufacture, the greater would be the pro-
portionate expense or natural price of it; the more the for-
38
SIR EDWARD WEST
eigner increased his, the less would be the natural price of
his manufacture, upon the principle that the larger the con-
cern in any manufacture the further can the subdivision of
labour and application of machinery be carried.-See W. of
N. B. 1. c. 3.
Next I shall consider the effects of a free importation of
corn upon rents. Supposing the proportionate expenses of
49 raising rude produce to remain the same, whatever were the ||
amount of that produce; there would be ground indeed for
the alarm of landlords. For it would appear, as has been
frequently stated, that in such case the farmer could not
afford to pay any rent at all. Thus suppose 100 acres of
land tilled for wheat let at a calculation of the price of wheat
at 90s. the quarter; and suppose the capital laid out on such
land to amount to 10007., take the rent at 300l. a-year, the
profits of the capital must be 10 per cent. i. e. 1007. a-year.
The whole produce of this land must therefore be 14007.
Suppose now wheat to fall, as it has fallen, one-third, i. e. to
60s. the quarter. The produce of the land would now be
only two-thirds of 14007. that is about 9327. and it is obvious
that the farmer, so far from being able to pay any rent, would
not even reproduce his capital laid out, and no diminution of
his capital would give him any profit, but would merely
diminish his loss.
.
But our principle will shew that by a diminution of the
capital laid out by the farmer, he will be enabled both to re-
produce his capital with the common profits of stock on that
capital, and also a rent not very much, perhaps, below that
which he paid before.
It is the diminishing rate of return upon additional por-
50 tions of capital bestowed upon || land that regulates, and
almost solely causes, rent.
If capital might be expended indefinitely with the same
advantage upon land, the produce would, of course, be un-
limited; and this would have the same effect upon rent as an
unlimited quantity of land convenient for cultivation. In
either case the rent would be very small. But it is the neces-
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
39
sity of having recourse to inferior land, and of bestowing
capital with diminished advantage on land already in tillage
which increases rent. Thus, if in case of any increased de-
mand for corn, capital could be laid out to the same advan-
tage as before, the growing price of the increased quantity
would be the same as before, and competition would, of
course, soon reduce the actual price to the growing price, and
there could be no increase of rent. But on any increased de-
mand for corn, the capital I have shewn which is laid out to
meet this increased demand is laid out to less advantage.
The growing price, therefore, of the additional quantity
wanted is increased, and the actual price of that quantity
must also be increased. But the corn that is raised at the
least expense will, of course, sell for the same price as that
raised at the greatest, and consequently the price of all corn
is raised by the increased demand. But the farmer gets 51
only the common profits of stock on his growth, which is
afforded even on that corn which is raised at the greatest ex-
pense; all the additional profit, therefore, on that part of the
produce which is raised at a less expense, goes to the landlord
in the shape of rent.
Thus suppose 10 acres of land which will return 20 per
cent. on a given capital, say 1007.; 10 acres which will return
19 per cent. and so on, as in the following table.
Net Produce.
Acres.
10
10
10
10
10
Capital.
100
100
100
100
100
20
19
18, &c.
11
10
Supposing the profits of stock to be 10 per cent. the last
ten acres could not be taken at any rent for the purpose of
cultivation, but might be cultivated by the owner of the land,
or might afford a rent if left as pasture. The 10 acres
which afford 11 per cent. would, after paying the profits on
the tenant's capital, pay one per cent. as rent, and as the
¿
40
SIR EDWARD WEST
corn which was raised on the 10 best acres would sell for
the same price as that raised on the 10 worst, such land
52 would pay to the landlord 107. as || rent, the next 10 acres 9l.,
and so on. Suppose now the price of corn to rise, and the
profit on the last 10 acres to be increased in consequence from
107. to 117. it is evident that the ten acres which before could,
in cultivation, just pay the profits of stock, would now afford
a rent, and might be brought into cultivation, and that the
rent would be raised on all land. For the same reason, if the
price of corn were to fall so as to reduce the profit on the last
10 acres one per cent. some land would be withdrawn from
cultivation, and the rent of that land which remained in cul-
tivation would be lowered. But we know that a rise in the
price of corn has the effect not only of drawing fresh land into
cultivation, but also of turning fresh capital on land before
in cultivation; and that a permanent fall in the price would
have the effect, not only of withdrawing land from tillage,
but also the effect of withdrawing part of the capital from
land which might be still kept in tillage and cultivated in a
less expensive manner. But if you take the 10 acres of land
I before mentioned, which return at the given price 20 per
cent., it would seem impossible for any diminution of price
under a diminution of one-half to draw capital from such
land; for if the price of corn were to fall so low as even to
53 reduce the profit to 11 || per cent., still it might be worth while
to lay out the same capital, as it would yield one per cent.
more than capital in any other employment, which one per
cent. would be the rent.
This difficulty is explicable on our principle alone. The
truth is, that any land which returns 20 per cent. on 100%.,
must, as I have shewn, return more on a lesser capital than
1007., and consequently must return more on the first portion
of 1007. laid out on it than on the latter portion of it, and
would consequently produce the return somewhat in this way,
the first 107. might reproduce 40 per cent. net produce; the
second 107. 30 per cent. and so on, and the last layer of capital
would not produce more than 10 per cent., as the farmer
.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
41
would, of course, lay on as much capital as would reproduce
him the common profits of stock, which are supposed to be
10 per cent.
The rent of the landlord would then still, as before, be all
that was made on the whole capital above what the last or
least profitable portion of that capital produced; and in the
same manner as before, if the price of corn increased so as to
make that portion of capital which before produced 10 per
cent. now produce 11 per cent. another portion of capital
would be laid on. And in the same manner, if the price of
corn were to fall so as to reduce || the profits on the last por- 54
tion of capital from 10 to 9 per cent. that portion would be
withdrawn. In case, then, of any fall in the price of corn,
that portion of the capital which before afforded the smallest
profit will be withdrawn, and that only will be left which
continues to yield an adequate return, and the effect of such
reduction of price on rent will be nearly as follows:
Suppose again the case of land let on the calculation of
the price of wheat at 90s. the quarter, the rent 3007. a-year,
the tenant's capital amounting to 10007. and his profit on
that capital to be 1007. a-year, the produce is, as before, 14007.
Now, after the reduction of wheat to 60s., if the tenant re-
tained the same capital on the land, he would not, as I
shewed, reproduce even his capital, much less be able to pay
any rent.
But suppose now on this fall of price he diminishes his
capital to 8001.
Since he made on his whole capital of 10007. before the
reduction of price 400l. i. e. 40 per cent. he must have made
more than 40 per cent. upon the first 8001. and even after
the reduction of price, he may make 40 per cent. on the 8007.
that is, 3207. of which his own share, as profit, will be 801.
leaving to the landlord 2401. as rent.||
Thus upon this supposition, a fall in the price of corn
of, would reduce rents but . The reader will perceive
that there are many considerations, such as taxes, poor rates,
and the distress of individuals, arising from a rapid shifting
55
42
SIR EDWARD WEST
of capital from one employment to another, which I have not
taken into the account in this essay, and therefore I have not
pretended to strike the balance of the arguments for and
against some restriction of importation; it appears to me,
however, that the principle which it has been my object to
explain will shew it to be highly impolitic to fix the price
below which importation is to be checked at a high point.
Those other considerations would demand a much longer in-
quiry; upon the whole, I am inclined to think, that it would
be reasonable to grant to the agriculturist, for the present,
such protection as would keep up the price of corn to 70s.,
or at the most 75s. the quarter.
OBSERVATIONS
ON THE
BOUNTY of 1688.
ANOTHER object of this publication is to shew the fallacy
of the arguments of those who have maintained, that the
bounty on the exportation of corn granted by the legislature
in 1688, rendered that article cheap.
A refutation of this, as I conceive, erroneous doctrine is
important, not only because such doctrine weakens our reli-
ance upon the truth of the general rule of political economy,
that all artificial regulations in commerce are injurious; a
rule which must frequently be the only guide, even of the
best informed, when treading a new ground in the science;
but because such doctrine has been used as a defence of para-
doxical opinions on the subject of the proposed corn bill.
56
I originally took up the subject of the bounty on the ex-
portation of corn, without any preconceived opinion as to its
merits; but merely because it forms one of the most promi-
nent features in the 1st report of the committee of the House
of Commons, and in Mr. | Malthus's," Lord Lauderdale's," 57
and Sir H. Parnell's " pamphlets. Of course, as the first step,
I examined the facts from which it had been inferred that the
bounty had lowered the price of corn, and was not a little
surprised to find that the facts do not at all support that
doctrine. This I trust I shall make appear to the reader.
But before I enter into an examination of the facts, I must
observe, that the principle which I have stated would shew
of itself, that if the bounty had any operation at all in in-
creasing our growth, it must have raised the price in the
home market above what it would otherwise have been; for
:
44
SIR EDWARD WEST
that principle shews that a larger growth is raised at a
greater proportionate expense than a smaller.
It may be necessary to premise for the information of those
who may not have given much attention to the subject of the
corn laws, that in 1688 a bounty of 5s. a quarter was granted
by the legislature on the exportation of corn, whilst it was at
or under 48s. the quarter; that this bounty was suspended
for a single year three or four times, between 1688 and 1765;
that in 1765 it was suspended for a year; and that this sus-
pension was annually renewed till 1773, when the bounty
58 was ultimately abolished. ||
Mr. Charles Smith, the author of the Corn Tracts, fre-
quently mentioned in the Wealth of Nations, was, as far as
I am informed, the first writer who maintained that the
bounty on exportation had the effect of reducing the price
of corn. His opinion has been adopted by many later writ-
ers, but with, as I shall presently prove, much less shew of
reason than that author had, considering the facts which
have subsequently occurred. One of the passages in which
Mr. C. Smith expresses this doctrine is as follows.
"The bounty was first given on the exportation of grain
in the year 1689,* now seventy years since, during which
period grain hath in general been from fifteen to twenty
per cent. cheaper than for forty years before that time, which
is a good proof of the utility of the law by which it is ordered
to be given, and which is further proved, in that since its
first establishment the parliament have not thought fit to
suspend it either in part, or the whole, only four times, viz.
in 1698, 1709, 1740, and 1757, which last suspension is still
in force, and to continue to Christmas next."
"That corn has been as much cheaper since the bounties
59 took place as before men- || tioned, is so notorious, that the
prices thereof to which the bounties are payable by law,
which when first established were thought moderate, and
under which the then parliament thought the farmer could
* This was written in January, 1759.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
45
not afford to grow it, are now thought very dear, and long
before corn is sold at those prices at which the bounties are
to cease of course, we have of late heard clamours for taking
the bounty off and stopping the exportation."
There can be no doubt that the average price of corn for
a period of several years, during the existence of the bounty
on exportation, was lower than at any period of the same
length before or since.
But that this low price of corn cannot with any fairness
be attributed to the bounty, will appear from an examination
of the tables of the prices for a considerable period before
the grant of the bounty, and during its continuance, and
after its abolition. It will be found that the average price
of corn for ten years
From 1649
to 1658 was
420?
d.
7 0
8.
From 1659
to 1668 Was 2 6 8
From 1669
to 1678 was 2 3 4
From 1679
to 1688 was 1 18 4
From 1689
27 0
to 1698 was
From 1699
to 1708 was 1 13 9
From 1709
2 7 5
to 1718 was
From 1719
to 1728 was 1 16 3
From 1729
to 1738 was 1 12 7
From 1739
to 1748 was 1 11 9
11
Average of 20 Years.
£2 6 10
2 0 10
2 0 4
2 1 10
1 12 0
It appears therefore that the price of corn had uniformly
declined during thirty years before the grant of the bounty.
For the ten years immediately after the grant of the bounty
it rose considerably, the next ten years fell again, and then
for the subsequent ten rose again much higher than it had
been before the grant of the bounty. And if you take the
fall in price for thirty years before the bounty it will be
* Smith's Corn Tracts, p. 99.18
60
46
SIR EDWARD WEST
61
found greater than that which took place even for sixty years
after it, and not only greater in amount but greater in pro-
portion. For the price of corn fell, in thirty years, before
the bounty, from 21. Ys. to 17. 18s. 4d., that is 8s. 8d. But
the price of corn even in the lowest ten years after the bounty
(from 1739 to 1748) was 17. 11s. 9d. which from 17. 18s. 4d.
is a fall of but 6s. 7d.
I cannot conceive any state of facts which || would lead
more directly than these to a conclusion the very opposite to
that which the advocates of the bounty have drawn from
them. A consideration of the subsequent rise of price after
its greatest depression in 1743 and 1744 will equally shew
that as a grant of the bounty was not the cause of the low
price of corn, neither was the repeal of it the cause of the
high price.* It will be found that the average price of
corn for ten years
From 1744
to 1753
From 1754
to 1763
From 1764
to 1773
From 1774
to 1783
From 1784
to 1793
was
was
was
£. s.
1 11
d.
9
1 16 4
2 9 7
was 2 5 1
Bounty repealed.
was 2 10
10 11
It appears therefore that the price of corn began to rise
twenty years before the repeal of the bounty, that for ten
years after the repeal instead of continuing to rise it rather
fell, and then began again to rise, but not near so rapidly as
62 it had done before the repeal of the bounty. ||
If instead of the years I have selected the average be
taken from any other point the result will be similar. Thus,
take the ten cheapest years, and then periods of ten years on
each side. The cheapest period in all our annals was from
*Surely it was not very bold, as Mr. Malthus asserts of Dr.
Smith, to deny the influence of the bounty in reducing the price
of corn. (See Essay on Population,¹ vol. ii, p. 240.)
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
47
1742 to 51. And it will be found that the price regularly
sinks as it approaches to, and ascends as it recedes from this
period. Thus the average of ten years
£. 8. d.
was 1 19
10
From 1702
to 1711 (
From 1712)
to 1721 S
From 1722
to 1731
}
From 1732 |
to 1741
From 1742
to 1751
From 1752
to 1761
From 1762)
to 1771
From 1772
to 1781 (
From 1782
to 1791
was
was
was
was
was
was
was
was
1 18 0
1 16
1 14
1 9
10
2
4
4-Lowest.
1 17 0
4 10
2 9 9 0
2 10 0
For more than twenty years then before the recal of the
bounty, (1773,) the price of corn had begun to rise. It is
clearly right to take || for this purpose the date of the total 63
abolition of the bounty, not the time (1765) at which the
annual suspension began, as the epoch of the recall, (though
Sir H. Parnell contends the contrary.) The annual suspen-
sion could not have destroyed the effect of the bounty, being
merely on account of the actual high price and temporary, so
that the growers would look forward to the renewal of the
bounty, when it could be of any service to them, namely,
when prices were low, and must have had the same encour-
agement from it as before. I may notice here, that if any
allowance of time is to be made for the bounty to come into
operation after it was granted, an equal allowance should be
made for it to cease to operate after its repeal. For if the
farmers could not immediately adapt themselves to the new
state of things when the bounty was granted, they would
probably require the same space of time to adapt their pro-
ceedings to the repeal of the bounty. It is proper, however,
48
SIR EDWARD WEST
}
to observe that the price of corn really began to rise from the
year 1744, which an examination of the tables will prove.
The rise, therefore, commenced twenty-nine years before the
repeal of the bounty, and twenty-one years before the annual
suspension. In fact, the low price of corn was the cause of the
64 grant of the bounty, and it was so expressed by the legisla-
ture. The year 1687 was a cheaper year than any in our
records, except the years 1743 and 1744;-(the average price
of the quarter of corn for the year 1687 was 17. 2s. 4d.; in
the years 1743 and 44 it was two-pence cheaper.) In 1688
the act which granted the bounty on the exportation of corn
was passed. And the preamble runs that, "Forasmuch as it
has been found by experience that the exportation of corn
and grain into foreign parts, when the price thereof is at a
low rate in this kingdom, has been a great advantage not
only to the owners of land, but to the trade of this kingdom
in general: Be it therefore," &c.
It is well known by all who are conversant with the his-
tory of that period, that it was the high price of corn, in
1773, which raised a clamour against the bounty, and in-
duced the legislature to repeal it; * so that in each case the
price of corn was the cause of legislative interference, and
not the effect. Corn was cheap, and exportation was natu-
rally not only allowed but encouraged; corn became dear, and
exportation was as naturally prohibited, yet, because the
cheapness continued under that encouragement, and the dear-
ness was not removed by the prohibition, it has been argued
65 that the || encouragement to export was the cause of the cheap-
ness, and the prohibition of exportation the cause of the dear-
ness.
Mr. Malthus has put the argument in favour of the bounty
in another shape, supposing it had the effect of steadying the
price of corn, and of lowering it on the whole by keeping it
down in scarce years, though he allows it may have raised
* See Smith's Corn Tracts, passim.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
49
it in plentiful years. See Malthus's Essay on Pop. pp. 239,
240, &c. and 259. 261."
Let us inquire then whether the price of corn fluctuated
more during the period of the bounty than at any other. In
order to ascertain the average degree of variation in different
periods of 20 years, I have taken the average price of the
ten dearest years, and the average price of the ten cheapest
years, in several different periods of twenty years; and have
set down the ratios of the higher prices to the lower. And
if the dearest and cheapest single years in any twenty be
taken, the ratio will be found nearly the same:
Ratio. Variation.
From 1649 to 1668 as 29 to 17 as 170 : 100
1669 1688 23 17
135 : 100
178: 100
-
141 : 100
1689 1708 25 14
1709 · 1728 24 17
1729
18
1748
1749 1768 22
1769 - 1788 -26
138 100
13
16
137 : 100
21
123 100
M
-
M
-
―――
G
-
>>
Mag
A
170.
135
178
141
138
137
123 ||
FINIS. ||
It appears that the variations in the price of corn in the
twenty years immediately preceding the grant of the bounty,
and in the twenty years immediately after the repeal of the
bounty, were much less than during any period of twenty years
during the existence of the bounty. I have made the calcula-
tion in different ways, and can venture to assert, also, that the
variation, during any period of moderate length, since the
alteration of the corn laws, in 1773 till 1794, has been much
less than during any period of the same length while the
bounty was in force.
66
50
SIR EDWARD WEST
67
68
YEARS.
Prices of Wheat per Quarter at Windsor Market.*
Prices of Wheat,
reduced to
the Winchester
Bushel
of 8 Gallons.
Prices of Wheat,
reduced to
the Winchester
Bushel
of 8 Gallons.
1646
1647
1648
1649
1650
1651
1652
1653
1654
1655
1656
1657
1658
1659
1660
1661
1662
1663
1664
1665
1666
1667
1668
1669
1670
1671
1672
1673
1674
1675
48 ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ — — — — ~ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ -
22 1
£. S. d.
2
3
3
3
3 15
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
2
1
2
♡ &
2
5
1 22 ∞
3
8
૭
∞ 14
5
11
3
11 11
1분
​21
0
9
1
17
APPENDIX.
18
2 10 23
20 10
1 12
8
54
18 24
53
91
8
64
64
11
2 1
1
17
7}
5 91
24
10 8
1 12 0
okta #
16 0
3 101
0
1 15 62
1 19
1 17 03/
1 17 4
LO
5
16 51
What och det nors
54
01
54
YEARS.
1676
1677
1678
1679
1680
1681
1682
1683
1684
1685
1686
1687
1688
1689
1690
1691
1692
1693
1694
1695
1696
1697
1698
1699
1700
1701
1702
1703
1704
1705
£.
1
-
1 2 ∞ ∞ ∞ H
2
2
2
2
1
1 Q
1
2
11 QHHH 2 ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ H
1
2
1
1
1
3
1 15
19
1
54
10 2&
41
102
8
2
2
3
2
S.
13
17
12
13
0
1
19
Q2 -
1
2
0
6
10
10
1
0
16
77
33 2
3 0
13
2 16
1 15
1 13
1
6
1 12
1
a.
6
91
4
51
4
*o a + c +
0
58
11
64
11
94
24
5&
14
10朵
​11
11
4
9
10º
64
5º
24
0
4
8 ||
* These are the Prices of Mealing Wheat; which is understood, at Eton
College, to be of a middling Quality.
THE APPLICATION OF CAPITAL TO LAND
51
YEARS.
1706
1707.
1708
1709
1710
1711
1712
1713
1714
1715
1716
1717
1718
1719
1720
1721
1722
1723
1724
1725
1726
1727
1728
1729
1730
1731
1732
1733
1734
1735
1736
1737
1738
1739
1740
1741
1742
1743
1744
1745
Prices of Wheat,
reduced to
the Winchester
Bushel
of 8 Gallons.
£.
1
1
13 ♡ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ 1 ∞ ∞ 1-
3
2
2
2
3 9
2
2
2
1 Q Q 1 2 2
2
2
1
S. d.
1 Q Q TH
or a co
1
3 11
4
2
5
18
2
0
1 14
1
11
1
12
1
13
1 12
1 10 104
104
11
104
4
16
1
9
8
∞ TO TH
1
5
4
12
3
0
17
51
1
77
1
12
51
1 9
21
1 3
81
521
1
1 14
61
1 18 24
1 15
1 13
104
91
4
0
21
4
9
8
101
91
11 6&
14 24
5 11
51
10 2&
1
2
1
1
2
1
1 4 51
2 1
24
8
7Z
61
11
10朵
​4
0
YEARS.
1746
1747
1748
1749
1750
1751
1752
1753
1754
1755
1756
1757
1758
1759
1760
1761
1762
1763
1764
1765
1766
1767
1768.
1769
1770
1771
1772
1773
1774
1775
1776
1777
1778
1779
1780
1781
1782
1783
1784
1785
Prices of Wheat,
reduced to
the Winchester
Bushel
of 8 Gallons.
£. 8. d.
14
10
12
12
1
8
1
14
1
17
1 19
=
1
1
1
1
11 2 2 2 H
1 10
1
1
1
1 HQ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 12 ~ ~ ~ N? Q
1
15
12
6
14
1 16
2
2
2 1
2
2 8
3
17
2 13
0
2 3
2
2 10
2
2 18
2
2
10
2
0
2
13
2
4
2
2
2
1800
111
10号
​10
104
22
21
2 19
11
15
11
11 31
8
10원
​0
12
13
14
13
8
87
94
1
14
4
51
3
51
94
8
14
54
0
11
4
91
77
6朵
​8
∞ ∞
8
2
8
4
16 14
3 11
51
91
24
91
o li
0
69
52
SIR EDWARD WEST
1
YEARS.
1786
1787
1788
1789
1790
1791
1792*
1793
1794
1795
1796
1797
1798
1799
Prices of Wheat,
reduced to
the Winchester
Bushel
of 8 Gallons.
£.
∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ #~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2
2
2.
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
2 5
9
16 14
16
14
9
4
13
0
15
8
14
0
1
6
4 0
2
2
0
0
8
3
2
8. d.
os 22 4
14
15
24
91
4
YEARS.
1800
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
1811
1812
1813
Prices of Wheat,
reduced to
the Winchester
Bushel
of 8 Gallons.
London. Printed by C. Roworth,
Bell-yard, Temple-bar.
£.
41 ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ⇓⇓∞ ∞ 2010
6
3
5
6
6
8. d.
7
8
7
0
9
8
3
18
19
6
12
8
8
0
0
6
2
0
6
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
*From this year, inclusive, the account at Eton College has been kept
according to the Bushel of Eight Gallons, under the provisions of the Act of
31 G. 3. c. 30. sect. 82.
NOTES
¹ (page 9) (a) Report from the Select Committee on Petitions
relating to the Corn Laws of this Kingdom; together with the
Minutes of Evidence, and an Appendix of Accounts. Ordered, by
The House of Commons, to be printed, 26 July, 1814."
"C
(b) Reports respecting Grain, and the Corn Laws: viz:
First and Second Reports from the Lords Committees, appointed
to enquire into the state of the growth, commerce, and consump-
tion of grain, and all laws relating thereto;-to whom were re-
ferred the several petitions, presented to the House this session,
respecting the Corn Laws.-25 July, 1814. Communicated by The
Lords, 23d November, 1814. Ordered, by The House of Commons,
to be printed, 23 November, 1814."
2 (page 11) The text of the "Wealth of Nations used and
cited by West is apparently that of the ninth edition (3 vol. 8°.
London, 1809); the " new edition" (3 vol. 8°), issued by Cadell
and Davies in 1812, corresponds in pagination, in the main, with
the ninth. This, as other citations from and references to Adam
Smith's work in West's text, contains minor inaccuracies, notably
an unwarranted use of italics.
3
(page 20) The passage actually occurs in the second para-
graph of chapter ix.
(page 22) In the original text an asterisk is used.
(page 25) See note 1, above.
G
(page 28) The Substance of the Speeches of Sir H. Parnell,
Bart. in the House of Commons with additional observations on
the corn laws" (London, 1814). This, as well as subsequent
citations, contains minor typographical inaccuracies.
(page 32) The passage is quoted loosely.
8 (page 34) 'Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects. In
two volumes. By David Hume, Esq.; Vol. 1, Containing Essays,
Moral, Political, and Literary. A new edition " (London, 1764).
6
7
""
0
""
(C
(page 35) "An Essay on the Principle of Population; or,
a view of its past and present effects on human happiness; with
an inquiry into our prospects respecting the future removal or
mitigation of the evils which it occasions (2 vol. 3rd. edit. Lon-
don, 1806). West's page reference to Malthus's text is incorrect,
the passage actually occurring on pp. 208-209.
66
""
10 (page 43) 'Observations on the Effects of the Corn Laws,
and of a rise or fall in the price of corn on the agriculture and
general wealth of the country" (London, 1815).
54
NOTES
"C
A Letter on the Corn Laws" (London, 1814).
“ (page 43)
12 (page 43) See note 6, above.
13 (page 45) "Tracts on the Corn Trade and Corn-Laws. By
Charles Smith, Esq. A new edition. With additions from the
marginal manuscripts of Mr. Catherwood. To which is now added
a supplement of interesting pieces on the same subject. With
some account of the life of Mr. Smith " (London, 1804).
14 (page 46) See note 9, above.
15 (page 49) See note 9, above.
reviewed 1986. Preservation
**
LANGA
*
C
A
*
·· · .. ..
**
M
-~-~
M
A
A
..
**..
A
C
.
****.
A
23
A
**
SO
"
P
Et
:";
S
...
14
ܢ
***
# C#
**...
.....
14
*
*
**
S
ܘ ܘܘܘܐܘ
*
......
Cent
MAN
1
Ae
*:
AY!
"
**
A
Septe
St
...
**
M