But the progress of wealth, of luxury, and idleness, in all the states of antiquity, substituted the servile for the patriarchal mode of cultivation. The population lost much in happiness and number by this change; the earth gained little in productiveness. The Roman proprietors extending their patrimonies by the confiscated territories of vanquished states, the Greeks by wealth acquired from trade,—first abandoned manual labour, and soon afterwards despised it. Fixing their residence in towns, they en trusted the management of their estates to stewards and inspectors of slaves ; and from that period, the condition of most part of the country population became intolerable. Labour, which had once been a point of communion be twixt the two ranks of society, now became a barrier of separation; contempt and severity succeeded to affection ate care ; punishments were multiplied as they came to be inflicted by inferiors, and as the death of one or seve ral slaves did not lessen the steward's wealth. Slaves who were ill-fed, ill-treated, ill-recompensed, could not fail to lose all interest in their master's affairs, and almost all understanding. Far from attending to their business with affection, they felt a secret joy every time they saw their oppressors' wealth diminished, or his hopes deceived. The study of science, accompanied with habits of observa tion, certainly advanced the theory of agriculture ; but its practice, at the same time, rapidly declined ; a fact, which all the agricultural writers of antiquity lament. The cul tivation of land was entirely divested of that intelligence, affection, and zeal, which had once hastened its success. The revenues were smaller, the expenses greater ; and front that period, it became an object to save labour, more i than to augment its produce. Slaves, after having driven every free cultivator from the fields, were themselves ra pidly decreasing in number. During the decline of the Roman empire, the populatian of Italy was not less re duced than that of the 4gro Romano is in our days; while, • at the SMTIC time, it had sunk into the last degree of wretchedness and penury. The cultivation of the co lonies situated on the Mexican Gulf, was founded, in like manner, on the baneful system of slavery ; it has, in like manner, consumed the population, debased the human species, and deteriorated the system of agriculture. The negro trade has of course filled up those voids, which the barbarity of planters annually produced in the agricultural population; and doubtless, under a system of culture, such that the man who labours is constantly reduced below the necessaries of life, and the man who does not labour keeps all for himself, the net produce has always been considera ble ; but the gross produce, with which alone the nation is'concerned, has uniformly been inferior to what would have arisen from any other system of cultivation, whilst the condition of more than seven-eighths of the population has continued to be miserable.
The invasions of the Roman empire, by the barbarians, introduced new manners, and, with them, new systems of cultivation. The conqueror, who had now become pro prietor, being much less allured by the enjoyments of • luxury, had need of men still more than of wealth. He had ceased to dwell in towns, he had established himself in the country ; and his castle formed a little principality, which he wished to be able to defend by his own strength, and thus he felt the necessity of acquiring.the affection of such as depended on him. A relaxation of the social bond, and the independence of great proprietors, produced the same effects without the limits of the ancient Roman empire as within. From the epoch of its downfall, mas ters in every part of Europe began to improve the condi tion of their dependents ; and this return to humanity produced the natural effect ; it rapidly increased the po pulation, the wealth, and the happiness of rural labourers.
Different expedients were resorted to for giving slaves and cultivators an interest in life, a property, and an affec tion for the place of their nativity, as well as for its lord. Adopted by various states, these expedients produced the most decisive influence on territorial wealth and popula tion. In Italy, and part of France and Spain, and proba bly in most part of the former Roman empire, the master shared the land among his vassals, and agreed with them to share the crops in a raw state. This is cultivation for half produce. In Hungary, Poland, Bohemia, and all that portion of Germany occupied by Sclavonic tribes, the master much more rarely enfranchised his slaves. Keep ing them always under an absolute dependence, as serfs attached to the soil, he gave them, however, one half of his land, reserving the other to himself. He wished to share, not the fruits of their labour, but their labour itself, and therefore he obliged them to work for him two, three, and in Transylvania, four days of each week. This is cul tivation by coroYes. In Russia, and several provinces of France and England, masters likewise distributed their lands among vassals; but, instead of wishing to partici pate either in the lands or the harvests, they imposed a fixed capitation. Such was the abundance of uncultivated land always ready to be clevtd, that, eyes of those proprietors, the only difference in the coMffition of agricul tural families was the number of workmen included in them. To capitation was always joined the obligation of personal services, and the vassal's continuance in a servile state. Yet, according as the laws watched more or less strictly over the subject's liberty, cultivation upon this principle raised the husbandman to a condition more or less comfortable. In Russia, he never escaped from servi tude of the soil ; in England, by an easy transition, he ar rived at the rank of farmer.
The system of cultivation by metayers, or cultivation at half produce, is perhaps one of the best inventions of the middle ages. It contributes, more than any thing else, to diffuse happiness among the lower classes, to raise land to a high state of culture, and accumulate a great quantity of wealth upon it. It is the most natural, the easiest, and most advantageous step for exalting the slave to the con dition of a freeman, for opening his understanding, teach ing him economy and temperance, and placing in his hands a property which he will not abuse. According to this system, the peasant is supposed to have no capital, or scarcely any, but lie receives the land sown and fully stock ed; he takes the charge of continuing every operation, of keeping his farm in the same state of cultur'e, of delivering to his master the half of each crop ; and, when the lease expires, of returning the land under seed, the folds furnish ed, the vines propped, and every thing, in short, in the same state of completeness as it was when he received it.
A metayer finds himself delivered from all those cares which, in other countries, weigh heavily on the lower class of the people. He pays no direct tax, his master alone is charged with it ; he pays no money-rent, and therefore he is not called to sell or to buy, except for his own domestic purposes. The term, at which the farmer has to pay his taxes or his rent, does not press the metaycr ; or constrain him to sell before the season, at a low price, the crop which rewards his industry. He needs but little capital, because he is not a dealer in produce ; the fundamental advances have been made once for all by his master ; and as to the daily labour, he performs it himself with his family ; for cultivation upon this principle brings constantly along with it a great division of the land, or what is cased cultivation on the small scale.