ence." Property is necessary to man's accomplishment of his destiny, because it is the indispensable complement of his individuality. Property in all the fruits of his work must be guaranteed to the worker. This is the decree of equity, and it is also the decree of the interests of society. It is only the certainty that he will enjoy this legitimate reward of his toil that will impel man to work his best and his hardest. "Make proprietors and you make good citizens," says P. L. Courier. Nothing can be more beneficial than to give the land to the men who work it the more an estate is divided, the more it will prosper and improve." § 10. Influence of Systems of Inheritance on the Productiveness of Labour. Differences in the system of inheritance have a considerable influence on men's activity, and on the constitution and progress of societies. Tocqueville (Democratie en Amérique, iii. 3) even asserts that "whenever human societies undergo any great change, hidden among its causes is invariably found the law of inheritance." An analysis of the motives which impel men to production establishes the fact that his daily needs are sufficient to keep the workman to his labour, and in the case of an exceptionally prudent man, to induce him to save a little as a provision for his old age on the other hand, to bring about great improvements of which the fruits will only be reaped after the lapse of years, the interests of children must be introduced as an incentive. No one will plant trees for a stranger to gather their produce. As La Fontaine puts it, "It is still worth while to build, but to begin planting at my age!" Thus for the creation and preservation of capital the institution of inheritance is an essential. To maintain and increase the productiveness of labour, is it better that all the real property should pass to one only of the children, as the English law desires, or that it should be shared among them all, as under the French code? The division of an estate may sometimes involve inconveniences, but these are as nothing compared to the immense advantage of making as many families as possible into proprietors. Property is the condition and complement of liberty. Ideally, every family should have its house, its field, and its instruments of labour, or a title representing a share in a common capital—a factory, for example, or some other enterprise. By the regulation of inheritances this ideal is attainable. § 11. Influence of Systems of Tenure on the Productiveness of Labour. Lands are cultivated sometimes directly by their owner, sometimes by other persons to whom he grants the occupation of them under such different conditions as métayage, leasage, emphyteusis, &c. Modes of tenure are favourable to production in proportion to the completeness with which they assure to the cultivator both the fruits of his labour and the benefit of his improvements. Thus tested, no system is equal to that of absolute proprietorship. Arthur Young, an economist of the eighteenth century well versed in agriculture, says, "Give a small proprietor a strip of rock, and he will make it into a garden. The magic of property turns sand into gold." In the Pyrenees, in Tuscany, on the slopes of the Apennines, or at Capri, that shelf of calcareous rocks at the entrance of the Gulf of Naples, famous as the retreat of Tiberius-in all these places the traveller will see the soil actually created by man's labour. Terraces of unmortared stones are constructed on the hill-sides: to these earth is carried in baskets, and often is carried afresh after each violent storm. Vines and olives are then planted, and at the foot of these grow corn and lupine. The proprietor has created his property by the sweat of his brow, and affords us an example of what men will do when they are assured of the exclusive enjoyment of the fruits of their toil. Again, Arthur Young tells us that, "with a yearly tenancy a farmer will ruin the finest soil," and the misery of the Irish and their wretched system of cultivation are his proofs. The cultivator cannot be expected to improve the soil if an increase of rent continually comes to rob him of the results. of his improvements. As means of forwarding agricultural progress, hereditary tenancy, emphy teusis, and long leaseholds compete the more closely with actual proprietorship in exact proportion to the greater security and permanence of the tenure. A scale of the different systems of land tenure may thus be formed, arranged according to the encouragement which they give to labour. The order will be, in descending scale : (1) Proprietorship vested in the cultivator. (4) Métayage. (5) Short leaseholds. (6) Tenure at will. § 12. Influence of Systems of Rewarding Labour on its Productiveness. Man will work with so much the more care and zeal the more exactly his reward is in proportion to the quantity and quality of his labour. Pay the industrious and the idle workman the same wages and it will be to the interest of both to do as little as possible. Since activity in labour is thus in proportion to the strength of the motives which result in it, labourers, compared in this respect, can be arranged in the following descending scale : (1) Those who keep for themselves all they produce. (2) Those who have a share in the profits. (3) Those paid according to the work done. (4) Those paid according to the time they are supposed to be working. (5) Slaves, the produce of whose labours belong to their masters. The small proprietor is already in his fields before the dawn, and at sunset he is still toiling; the harvest, that is to say his welfare, depends on his industry. On the other hand, the idleness of government officials is proverbial, and it is so, because they are treated the same whatever quantity of work they do. Lastly, slavery, by taking from man his rights of property as well as of liberty, has blighted his labours with barrenness, and it was slavery which formed the principal obstacle to material progress among the peoples of antiquity. § 13. Influence of Systems of Government on the Productiveness of Labour. "Riches," said J. B. Say, in 1803, "are absolutely independent of political organisation." In this opinion he was profoundly mistaken. Nothing is more favourable to the production of wealth than a good government, nothing more fatal than a bad. To this the history of all countries and of all eras bears witness, and its lessons are better understood by Montesquieu when he tells us "countries are not prosperous by reason of their fertility, but by reason of their liberty;" and by Tocqueville, who writes, |