1805.] Miscellanies. 137

troubles himself to look into Such authors as Smith,* Paley,+ Mal- thus,+ Marshball,8 find proved, by incontrovertible arguments. But I Cannot agree with him that the conversion of arable land into pasture, 15 a dimimittion of profit to the cultivator, provided the land will bear good grass. That when converted it is more valuable, may be presumed trom the fact, that pasture Jets invariably at a higher rent than the best arable adjoining. The expence of converting is nearly the whole: to keep it in a productive State, it is only necessary-not to exhaust itz the produce indeed is tytheable; but it is the increase by expensive cultivation. On theother hand, if, at the cost of 100I. for instance, an additional quantity of corn be obtained of the valne of 1101 the tythe owner receives 111. and the farmer 991. he would be much benvnefited by the abolition of tytues, though he Should pay more rent; be could Dire his farm for 14 or 21 years, as in this eastern part of the country, (Suffolk) or for lives, as in tbe western, with the animatipg prospect of reaping the reward of his exertions. Now, if the parson with whom be has compounded for three years, the utmost term, I believe allowed by law, Should break his neck in a fox chace, the agreement is vacated by the fall, and the farmer left at the mercy of the Succeeding incum- bent. Asto the right of tythes being of 1000 years standing, Black- tone may inform the gentleman, that they have not always been enjoyed precisely as at present. Within this period there has been a fourfold diviSion---for the bishop---the fabric of the church---the poor ---and the incumbent. Afterwards, the bishop being otherwise pro- vided for, the division was only in three parts. The parsons at length obtained all the tythes for themselves, and the church and poor were thrown upon the parish. Permit me to add, the claim of the Parson, black or grey, was never attacked by me; it would be as absurd to question the legality as to defend the policy of it. I wich that a burthensome, disgusting, and injurious interference Should be removed, but not by violent means; and to evince this, recommend an unob- Jectionable commutation, a proportion of the improved rent. Your's,&c. A FARMER.

To the Same. SIR,

A Scarcity must at all times interest the feelings of the public at large, and will naturally excite the exertions of every one to remove any obstacle that may tend to operate against the progress of agricul- ture. Permit me to make a few obsgervations, in answer to two let- ters,(WHICH APPEARED IN YOUR LAST PAPER) it 13 there stated, “< that the foundation of all property is law, and'tbat tythes are the most ancient Species of property therein recognized." Is this a Sound reason why the abolition of tythes Should not be recommended to legislative attention, if tbey are found preju.licial to the community? 1s a law to continue in force because it has existed a thousand Years? Though tythes are a right of 50 many Years Standing, if they operate at all against the produce of corn, it is to be regretted that they were

* Wealth of Nations, vol. 3, Page 275, edit. 8.

+ Moral and Political Philosophy, vol. 2, page 406. 4 On Population, page 440, 4th edition.

S On Landed Property, page 17.