Of the 17,000,000 of acres which we have men tioned as covered with wood in France, the propor tion belonging to government is about 3,700,000 acres. A very small part of this is allowed to grow for large timber. The rest is subject to an annual cutting and sale, for fuel, a purpose for which coal is very little used in France, except in the case of forges, glass-houses, and other large works. In the government forests, gross mismanagement took place during the disorders of the Revolution. Extensive tracts were sold for an insignificant consideration while, in those that remained, timber was felled witg a lavish hand, and without any regard to the ulti mate effect on these valuable properties. The case, however, was altered in 1801, when a special board, appointed for the care of the forests, introduced the most satisfactory regulations. In the years of finan cial pressure (1815, 1816, and 1817), it was pro posed to effect sales of these great domains : but a fair price being unattainable, government continues to keep them, and derives, from the wood annually cut and sold, a revenue of from L.700,000 to L.800,000 Sterling. Fuel being little wanted in the south of France, the forests are confined to remote and rugged situations. These, like most of the fa rests of the kingdom, harbour a multitude of wolves, which are frequently destructive to the sheep and lambs. Regular officers, called Lieutenants de Lou veterie, are appointed for wooded districts ; and, on occasions of heavy loss, recourse is had to a general • battue, of which the usual result is a partial destruc ' tion of these animals, without any sensible reduction of their numbers at large. Bears, also, are found in the forests, but they are much more rare, being con. fined to the high lying districts in the Alps and Py renees.
After these observations on the agriculture of France, it remains-to compare its produce with that of our own country—an inquiry that naturally di vides into two parts—the total, or, as it is termed, the gross amount produced, and the nett income afforded after all deductions for expence of culture. First, as to the gross produce, Dr Colquhoun estimates the property created in Great Britain and Ireland, in the year 1812, by agriculture, in all its branches, at nearly L.217,000,000 Add for seed corn, not included in this estimate. Also for the in crease of our population, and cor responding increase of our produce from 1812 to 1820, 33,000,000 L.250,000,000 Deduct for decrease in prices by the change from war to peace, 25 per cent. 62,500,000 Remains, L.187,500,000 The amount of property annually created by agriculture in France is computed, by M. Chaptal at L.190,000,000 This calculation was made in peace, and at prices (see the preceding corn table) so low that, to bring them to an equality with our own, even in peace, we must make an addition - 80,000,000 Together, L.270,000,000 Those readers who imagine that the addition for the difference in the value of money is too large, have merely to refer to the quantities of produce in the preceding corn table, or to the surer test afford ed by the relative population of the two countries. Supposing that our population is now increased to 19 millions, that of France still exceeds it by fully 10 millions, a number which, were the consumption of the individual the same, would imply, on the part of France, an annual production of the value of above L.280,000,000. If to this a small addition be made for the French produce exported, our estimate will be found to make the requisite allowance for the plainer fare of Frenchmen, and a small allow ance will be deemed sufficient when we take into ac count the very cheap diet of the Irish part of our population. But the point to be explained is not how France produces so much, but how she does not produce more. Britain and Ireland are to her, is territorial extent, in the proportion of 61 to 100, but in produce they are as 69 to 100. As the soil of France, if not superior, on an average, to that of England and Ireland, is greatly superior to that of Scotland or Wales, to what are we to look for the inferiority of her produce ? There are, we appre hend, two main causes—first, the- waste of large tracts in wood, and next, the inadequacy of manual labour, largely as it is afforded by her dense agricul tural population, to counterbalance the productive powers of the capital and machinery applied by us to agriculture.
We come next to the question of the clear income arising from land, the amount of which was seldom above a fourth part of the gross produce, since it implies a number of very heavy deductions, viz, the support of the farmers, their families, their servants, their cattle ; the mortality and depreciation of live stock; wages, wear of tools and implements ; in short, of every description of charge that intervenes between preparing the ground for culture, and rea lizing its produce in money. In regard to France, we are enabled to proceed in such computations with considerable accuracy, in consequence of several late estimates made by order of government, of which the highest, and we believe the most accurate, made in 1815, gives, for the clear return of the land, about L.52,000,000 To which adding, to bring the low prices in the valuation to a par with our own, 28,000,000 Total, L.75,000,000 a sum, including not rent merely, but rent and far. mer's profit together. In England, our best autho rity for this purpose is the return made under the property-tax act, in 1810, a time when our paper currency was but slightly depreciated. This re turn gave, for England and Wales, for rent solely, about • . L.29,000,000 Add for Scotland and Ireland, a com puted amount of 11,000,000 Deduct for decrease of rent, increase of poor-rate, and other burdens since 1810, - 40,000,000 25 per cent. . 10,000,000 leaving, after payment of tithe and poor-rate, 30,000,000 The collective income of the farmers of England and Wales, in 1810, was, like the rent, about L.29,000,000, to which, making a similar addition for Scotland and Ireland, and a similar deduction for the fall of prices, and increase of burdens, the result is a farther sum of 30,000,000 In all, L.60,000,000 In these returns of nett income the balance is con siderably more in our favour than in those of gross produce. In the one Britain and Ireland are to France as 69 to 100 ; in the other as 80 to 100. To what is this extraordinary disadvantage on the side of France to be attributed ? We answer, to the employing of manual labour instead of machinery, and to the very great addition thus caused to the number of persons to be supported out of the produce of the land before realizing its proceeds. In England and Scotland the agriculturists are not to the population at large as 40 to 100; and, after making a large ad dition for Ireland, which bears, in its petty occupan cies, no slight resemblance to France, the result does not give, for our whole population, 44 persons in 100 dependent for support on agriculture. But in France, this proportion exceeds 60 in 100; and there arc thus to be supported out of agricultural produce above 5.000,000 persons more than there would be, were the proportion of agriculturists as in Britain and Ire land.
The average income of the whole kingdom, per English acre, is, we have already said, 9 1 But as this includes the rent of houses in towns, there is to be deducted, on that ac count, a sixth, or 1 6 Leaving - 7 7 To which, adding one-half for the very low prices in the French estimate, 3 9 The result is 11 4 per acre, valuing the produce according to the cur rency of English markets. This comprises both landlord's rent and farmer's profit. There are at present no satisfactory means of computing either separately ; but, if we suppose them equal, the rental of France is only L. 26,000,000 From which, by a single tax, the Fon der, a deduction is made of above 5,000,000 Leaving L.21,000,000 Equal in England, after making allow ance for the difference of money, to L.30,000,000 In other words, the rental of Britain and Ireland, after allowing for the difference of money, and after deducting tithe, poor-rate, and taxes of every kind, is equal to that of all France,—a proof, if any were wanting, how much more our landholders are fa voured by the Legislature than those of the same class on the south side of the Channel.