list2- 第31部分

political　influence　unless　they　live　at　the　Court；　or　occupy



offices　of　State；　and　where　all　public　power　and　influence　is



centralised　in　the　national　metropolis；　landowners　are　attracted　to



that　central　point；　where　almost　exclusively　they　can　find　the



means　of　satisfying　their　ambition；　and　opportunities　for　spending



the　income　of　their　landed　property　in　a　pleasant　manner；　and　the



more　that　most　landowners　get　accustomed　to　live　in　the　capital；



and　the　less　that　a　residence　in　the　provinces　offers　to　each



individual　opportunities　for　social　intercourse　and　for　mental　and



material　enjoyments　of　a　more　refined　character；　the　more　will



provincial　life　repel　him　and　the　metropolis　attract　him。　The



province　thereby　loses　and　the　metropolis　gains　almost　all　those



means　of　mental　improvement　which　result　from　the　spending　of



rents；　especially　those　manufactures　and　mental　producers　which



would　have　been　maintained　by　the　rent。　The　metropolis　under　those



circumstances；　indeed；　appears　extremely　attractive　because　it



unites　in　itself　all　the　talents　of　the　intellectual　workers　and



the　greatest　part　of　the　material　trades　which　produce　articles　of



luxury。　But　the　provinces　are　thereby　deprived　of　those　mental



powers；　of　those　material　means；　and　especially　of　those



industries；　which　chiefly　enable　the　agriculturist　to　undertake



agricultural　improvements；　and　stimulate　him　to　effect　them。



　　　　In　these　circumstances　lies　to　a　great　extent　the　reason　why　in



France；　especially　under　absolute　monarchy；　alongside　of　a



metropolis　surpassing　in　intellect　and　splendour　all　towns　of　the



European　continent；　agriculture　made　but　slight　progress；　and　the



provinces　were　deficient　in　mental　culture　and　in　useful



industries。　But　the　more　that　the　landed　aristocracy　gains　in



independence　of　the　Court；　and　in　influence　in　legislation　and



administration；　the　more　that　the　representative　system　and　the



system　of　administration　grants　to　the　towns　and　provinces　the



right　of　administering　their　own　local　affairs　and　of　taking　part



in　the　legislation　and　government　of　the　State；　and　consequently



the　more　that　respect　and　influence　can　be　attained　in　the



provinces　and　by　living　there；　so　much　the　more　will　the　landed



aristocracy；　and　the　educated　and　well…to…do　citizens；　be　drawn　to



those　localities　from　which　they　derived　their　rents；　the　greater



also　will　be　the　influence　of　the　expenditure　of　those　rents　on　the



development　of　the　mental　powers　and　social　institutions；　on　the



promotion　of　agriculture；　and　on　the　development　of　those



industries　which　are　useful　to　the　great　masses　of　the　people　in



the　province。



　　　　The　economical　conditions　of　England　afford　proof　of　this



observation。　The　fact　that　the　English　landed　proprietor　lives　for



the　greatest　portion　of　the　year　on　his　estates；　promotes　in



manifold　ways　the　improvement　of　English　agriculture：　directly；



because　the　resident　landowner　devotes　a　portion　of　his　rent　to



undertaking　on　his　own　account　improvements　in　agriculture；　or　to



supporting　such　improvements　when　undertaken　by　his　tenants；



indirectly；　because　his　own　consumption　tends　to　support　the



manufactures　and　agencies　of　mental　improvement　and　Civilisation



existing　in　the　neighbourhood。　From　these　circumstances　it　can



further　partly　be　explained　why　in　Germany　and　in　Switzerland；　in



spite　of　the　want　of　large　towns；　of　important　means　of　transport；



and　of　national　institutions；　agriculture　and　Civilisation　in



general　are　in　a　much　higher　condition　than　in　France。



　　　　But　the　great　error　into　which　in　this　matter　Adam　Smith　and



his　school　have　fallen　is　that　which　we　have　already　before



indicated；　but　which　can　be　here　more　clearly　shown；　viz。　that　he



did　not　clearly　recognise　the　influence　of　manufactures　on　the



increase　of　rents；　on　the　market　value　of　landed　property　itself；



and　on　the　agricultural　capital；　and　did　not　state　this　by　any



means　to　its　full　extent；　but；　on　the　contrary；　has　drawn　a



comparison　between　agriculture　and　manufactures　in　such　a　manner



that　he　would　to　a　make　it　appear　that　agriculture　is　far　more



valuable　and　important　nation　than　manufactures；　and　that　the



prosperity　resulting　from　it　is　far　more　lasting　than　the



prosperity　resulting　from　the　latter。　Adam　Smith　in　so　doing　merely



sanctioned　the　erroneous　view　of　the　physiocratic　school；　although



in　a　somewhat　modified　manner。　He　was　evidently　misled　by　the



circumstance　that　　as　we　have　already　demonstrated　by　the



statistical　conditions　of　England　　the　material　agricultural



capital　is　（even　in　the　richest　manufacturing　country）　ten　to



twenty　times　more　important　than　the　material　manufacturing



capital；　in　fact；　even　the　annual　agricultural　productiOn　far



exceeds　in　value　the　total　manufacturing　capital。　The　same



circumstance　may　also　have　induced　the　physiocratic　school　to



over…estimate　the　value　of　agriculture　in　comparison　with



manufactures。　Superficially　considered；　it　certainly　appears　as　if



agriculture　enriches　a　country　ten　times　more；　and　consequently



deserves　ten　times　more　consideration；　and　is　ten　times　more



important　to　the　State　than　manufactures。　This；　however；　is　merely



apparent。　If　we　investigate　the　causes　of　this　agricultural



prosperity　to　their　basis；　we　find　them　principally　in　the



existence　of　manufactures。　It　is　those　218　millions　of



manufacturing　capital　which　have　principally　called　into　existence



those　3；311　millions　of　agricultural　capital。　The　same



consideration　holds　good　as　respects　means　of　transport；　it　is　the



money　expended　in　constructing　them　which　has　made　those　lands



which　are　within　the　reach　of　the　canals　more　valuable。　If　the



means　of　transport　along　a　canal　be　destroyed；　we　may　use　the　water



which　has　been　hitherto　employed　for　transport；　for　irrigating



meadows　　apparently；　therefore；　for　increasing　agricultural



capital　and　agricultural　rents；　&c。；　but　even　supposing　that　by



such　a　process　the　value　of　these　meadows　rose　to　millions；　this



alteration；　apparently　profitable　to　agriculture；　will　nevertheless



lower　the　total　value　of　the　landed　property　which　is　within　reach



of　the　canal　ten　times　more。



　　　　Considered　from　this　point　of　view；　from　the　circumstance　that



the　total　manufacturing　capital　of　a　country　is　so　small　in



comparison　with　its　total　agricultural　capital；　conclusions　must　be



drawn　of　a　totally　different　character　from　those　which　the　present



and　preceding　school　have　drawn　from　it。　The　maintenance　and



augmentation　of　the　manufacturing　power　seem　now；　even　to　the



agriculturist；　the　more　valuable；　the　less　capital　as　compared　with



agriculture　it　requires　to　absorb　in　itself　and　to　put　into



circulation。　Yes；　it　must　now　become　evident　to　the　agriculturist；



and　especially　to　the　rent…owners　and　the　landed　proprietors　of　a



country；　that　it　would　be　to　their　interest　to　maintain　and　develop



an　internal　manufacturing　power；　even　had　they　to　procure　the



requisite　capital　without　hope　of　direct　recompense；　just　as　it　is



to　their　interest　to　construct　canals；　railways；　and　roads　even　if



these　undertakings　yield　no　real　nett　profit。　Let　us　apply　the



foregoing　considerations　to　those　industries　which　lie　nearest　and



are　most　necessary　to　agriculture；　e。g。　flour　mills；　and　there　will



be　no　room　for　doubt　as　to　the　correctness　of　our　views。　Compare；



on　the　one　hand；　the　value　of　landed　property　and　rent　in　a



district　where　a　mill　is　not　within　reach　of　the　agriculturist；



with　their　value　in　those　districts　where　this　industry　is　carried



on　in　their　very　midst；　and　we　shall　find　that　already　this　single



industry　has　a　considerable　effect　on　the　value　of　land　and　on



rent；　that　there；　under　similar　conditions　of　natural　fertility；



the　total　value　of　the　land　has　not　merely　increased　to　double；　but



to　ten　or　twenty　times　more　than　the　cost　of　erecting　the　mill



amounted　to；　and　that　the　landed　proprietors　would　have　obtained



considerable　advantage　by　the　erection　of　the　mill；　even　if　they



had　built　it　at　their　common　expense　and　presented　it　to　the



miller。　The　latter　circumstance；　in　fact；　takes　place　every　day　in



the　backwoods　of　North　America；　where；　in　cases　when　an　individual



has　not　adequate　capital　to　erect　such　works　entirely　at　his　own



expense；　the　landowner　gladly　helps　him　by　contributing　labour；　by



team　work；　free　gifts　of　timber；　&c。　In　fact；　the　same　thing　also



occurred；　although　in　another　form；　in　countries　of　earlier



civilisation；　here　must　undoubtedly　be　sought　the　origin　of　many



ancient　feudal　'common　mill'　rights。



　　　　As　it　is　in　the　case　of　the　corn　mill；　so　is　it　in　those　of



saw；　oil；　and　plaster　mills；　so　is　it　in　that　of　iron　works；



everywhere　it　can　be　proved　that　the　rent　and　the　value　of　landed



property　rise　in　proportion　as　the　property　lies　nearer　to　these



industries；　and　especially　according　as　they　are　in　closer　or　less



close　commercial　relations　with　agriculture。



　　　　And　why　should　this　not　be　the　case　with　woollen；　flax；　hemp；



paper；　and　cotton　mills？　Why　not　with　all　manufacturing　industries？



We　see；　at　least；　everywhere　that　rent　and　value　of　landed　property



rise　in　exactly　the　same　proportion　with　the　proximity　of　that



property　to　the　town；　and　with　the　degree　in　which　the　town　is



populous　and　industrious。　If　in　such　comparatively　small　districts



we　calculate　the　value　of　the　landed　property　and