growing of corn may be considered as the chief object of British farmers; though in many of the inland districts, the grazing- system is more extensi‘ely follow ed, and little grain cultivated, except what is required for the consumption of the neighbouring inhabitants. Perhaps the most perfect system of husbandry is that which conjoins the corn and grazing trade, usually called the alternate husbandry, Nu here two culmilerous crops do not follow in the rotation, but grass, or one or other of the leguminous varieties, succeeds each corn crop. If this system be diligently exercised, it is a matter of little importance to the soil what varieties either of cul miferous or leguminous articles are cultivated, because it will be equally benefited; though local circumstances may render it for the interest of the tenant to cultivate one kind in preference to another. The alternate hus bandry more in Britain than in any part of Eu rope, Flanders excepted, and is rapidly spreading in every district. In fact, a system of that nature is emi nently beneficial to every soil, and most advantageous for the tenant in eve ry situation, though the proper crops to be cultivated M. petal entirely upon soil and climate. These so much in Britain, as to preclude didactic rules concerning the crops which may be most profit ably cultivated; but, \dm re th soil and climate are fa yourahle, and manure is at the command of the tenant, wheat always forms a prominent article of British cul ture. So much of the soil, nowever, is of inferior qua lity, and the climate in many d.striets is so unfavourable to the growth of that grain, as to render the culture of oats in many cases more bent_ facial. Wheat is indeed now cultivated in Britain to an extent almost equal to the consumption of the inhabitants, notwithstanding the general preddt ction for bread made from that grain, which furnishes a good reason for bringing waste ground scattered up and down the island into immediate culti vation. Without adopting a measure of this nature, the country cannot be furnished with a regular supply of grain, independent of the aid of fort ign nations; and this aid, under existing circumstances, must be viewed not only as precarious and uncertain, hut as placing the country in a state of dependence, which every consider ate person must certainly deprecate.
Notwithstanding all the advantages which arc en joyed, perfect husbandry is not to be looked for in Great Britain, unless leases are more generally granted, and a greater degree of liberty allowed to the tenant than has been hitherto enjoyed under the customary covenants. Perhaps the lease-hold tenure is more fre quent in Britain, and discretionary management more prevalent than in other countries. To these things, and the security afforded to property by a wise system of laws, may the superiority of British husbandry be at tributed. Several other minor advantages have been noticed, and the whole connected together are eminent ly beneficial to the prosperity of the state. A wise economist would, however, study to improve all these advantages. To do away every obstacle in the road of improvement, would by him be considered as an impor tant service to the community. The art of agriculture has been viewed as the parent from whence all others spring ; and the more the parent art is improved, so much more encouragement will be afforded to the increase of the inferior ones. This island has already derived nu merous advantages from the increased attention shown to the improvement of its agriculture ; and it is to be hoped this attention will continue to increase, and be thereby a constant aid furnished to national prosprity. The decline of agriculture would be the surest symp tom of national ruin. Britain hitherto has matched any part of the world in a knowledge of the arts, and in the practice of trade and manufactures. The origin of that knowledge, and the source of these practices, may, in some measure, be traced to the improvement of its agri culture. This art forms the basis or foundation on which all others arc reared; and as it is more perfect in Britain than in other countries, commerce and manu factures have risen to proportional excellence.—The subject might he enlarged upon much farther, but what we have said in a preceding Section, will show sufficient ly the causes of the superiority of British husbandry to that of foreign countries, and the advantages which are derived to die nation from that superiority.
The bond of connexion between proprietors and ten ants, or the nature of the system wench win (AS tnesc two classes together, is of much more importance to the cause of agriculture than many of our writers on rural economy seem to imagine. In fact, the moral excite ment, or degree of tncouragemcnt given to the tenant for improving the ground put under his occupation, is regulated entirely by the terms or conditicms of the lease under which lie holds possession. If the condi tions be liberal and judicious, and accommodated to the soil and situation of the land thereby demised to the tenant, all that is obligatory upon the proprietor is faith fully discharged. But, when matters are otherwise, when the tenant possesses under a short lease ; when the covenants or obligations are severe in the first in stance, and ultimately of little avail towards forwarding improvement, it may reasonably be inferred, that the con nexion is improperly constituted, and that little benefit will thence follow either to the public, or to the parties concerned.
Holding land under a lease is a very ancient tenure in Britain, though the obligations of that instrument have varied and altered materially since the tenure was first established. We have already, in a cursory manner, pointed out the utility of leases, and described the an cient state of the agriculturists of this country. We have described the original cultivators as persons who managed the ground in behalf of the proprietors, and to whom a certain proportion of the produce was allotted for maintenance or themselves and those under them. They did not possess any stock of their own, but acted merely as servants of the proprietors, who furnished the means by which cultivation was carried on, and to whom they were liable for the value of stock put into their hands, and for the remainder of the produce after their own allowance and the expense of management were defrayed. This view of the husbandman's situation in ancient times, accords with the accounts given of it by the late lord Karnes, an authority of no small considera tion, and indeed is analogous with the state of property and society at the time, and quite consistent with the records transmitted to us. His lordship says, that "lands were originally occupied by bondmen, who were the property of the landlord, and consequently were not ca pable to hold any property of their own ; but, such per sons who had no interest to be industrious, and who were under no compulsion when not under the eye of their master, were generally lazy, and always careless. This made it eligible to have a free man to manage the farm, who, probably, at first got some acres set apart to for his maintenance and wages. But this not being a sufficient spur to industry, it was found a salutary mea sure to assume this man as a partner, by communicating to him a proportion of the product, in place of wages, by which he came to manage for his own interest as well as that of his master. The next step had still a better effect, entitling the master to a yearly quantity certain, and the overplus to remain with the servant. By this contract, the benefit of the servant's industry accrued wholly to himself, and his indolence or ignorance hurt himself alone. One further step was necessary to bring the contract to its due perfection, which is, to give the servant a lease for years, without which, he is not se cure that his industry will turn to his own profit. By a contract in these terms, he acquired the name oftenant, because he was entitled to hold the possession for years certain." The slightest trace of security being attained in the possession of landed property to 13ritain, cannot be found earlier than the reigns of the Anglo-Saxon monarchs of Scotland, and after the Norman conquest of England ; since which periods, property has been possessed nearly under the same tenures, though not under the same burdens, as at this day. But though the possession of property may be considered as uniformly held under the crown, yet the situation of those who bore the heat and burden of the day, those who laboured the ground and made it productive, was vastly dissimilar. Originally there was no description of property in the country, ex cept the soil and the animals reared upon it ; therefore, when the soil was portioned out and allocated amongst those to whom the sovereign was pleased to grant it, the remainder of the people, left unprovided, were to all in tents and purposes entirely dependent upon those on whom land had been bestowed ; because, from the situa tion of the country at the time, no other resource or means of support was to be found. The proprietors who obtained grants of land from the crown, conveyed part of it to their principal dependents, as feudatories or vassals, and from the circumstances of charter and seisin being taken upon these conveyances, it has been suppo sed that leasehold was a tenure of very ancient date. There is reason, however, to assert, that leases were unknown, at least in Scotland, till the clergy obtained landed possessions ; and that the like tenure was after wards extended to the tenants of the lay proprietors, as the country increased in wealth, and as the circum stances and condition of the actual cultivators were im proved and meliorated. Not sooner than 1449, how ever, was any tenant secure of possession, though the clauses of his lease were ever so strong ; nor was he se cured against the claims of the proprietor's creditors till twenty years afterwards, when an act passed freeing him from all claims exceeding the actual rents due by him. In England, the tenant seems to have remained longer in an insecure and precarious state than even in Scotland ; for till the act 20th Henry VIII. was passed, any tenant might be ejected by the form of process, call ed a common recovery. From these circumstances, the degraded condition of cultivators or farmers in an cient times will easily be ascertained ; and from what will afterwards appear, their condition does not seem to be so much improved as imperiously called for upon principles calculated to promote the public interest. The prosperity of the state is at all times intimately connected with the successful cultivation of the soil, and the increase of agricultural produce ; every circum stance, therefore, prejudicial to the one, is necessarily prejudicial to the other.