CHAPTER XXV. BOUNTIES ON PRODUCTION. WHILE the present artificial and restricted system of international commerce continues to be acted on by most nations, it may, under such peculiar circumstances, be proper to encourage the introduction of new manufactures, and the production of raw produce, particularly of corn, by a bounty, or by the imposition of duties on foreign productions which have a corresponding effect; if so, the question to be considered in the case of a bounty is, how it can best be applied to effect the end in view in the most just, effectual, and economical manner? If, on corn, a certain sum were paid per quarter, it would all go to the landholders in the form of rent, which would be unjust, because they could have no right to it; and, as the price of corn would be, to a certain extent, lowered by the effect of the bounty and supply, the landholders would be gainers by its cheapness If, in common with all other consumers. indeed, the community could afford it, and the landholders were to employ this additional revenue in productive labour, the nation would neither be richer nor poorer; if the additional produce were not derived from poorer soils, the national advantage obtained by the measure would be, the having a greater supply of food of its own production, and being independent on foreign nations for one of the first necessaries of life; but, from experience, we may safely conclude, that the landholders, as a body, would dissipate the addition made to their revenue by the bounty, in some unproductive mode or other, if not expend it on our foreign enemies by absenteeism; and, therefore, a bounty, to be paid in the above manner, would be disadvantageous as well as unjust.The most proper and equitable mode would be to levy the amount of the bounty by a tax on rent, which tax would be repaid to the landholders by their tenants, who would receive it from the government in the shape of bounty, and by the extended cultivation and consequent improvement of their lands, they, the landholders, would ultimately gain an addition to their rent, which would much more than counterbalance the loss of interest on the amount of the tax, &c., while the nation at large would be benefited by the increase of its productions, as already mentioned.* But, if a bounty were paid on the bringing waste lands into cultivation, reclaiming tracts of ground from the sea, draining lakes and marshes, clearing rocky land, or for any similar improvements of a like nature with the above, viz. adding to the cultivable surface of the country, the nation would gain more than the amount of the bounty, inasmuch as most or all agricultural improvements of the above description, when once made, are made for ever, and a productive capital securely and permanently invested for the national benefit. Much confusion in the consideration of this subject has arisen from the artifice of the landholders, in falsely assuming, that their interest coincided with that of the farmer, and thereby, under the appellation of agricultural interest, persuading the rest of the nation that such was really the case. From which cause it has happened, that, although we know corn and most other principal products of agriculture to be annual productions, and, therefore, produced principally by circulating capital, which may be easily and quickly taken from, or applied to, the purposes of cultivation, yet we have been led to submit to legislative enactments of the most burdensome and fleecing description; proceeding on the supposition, that it must require many years to increase the production of corn, and, therefore, that we must provide for an independent supply long before it may be wanted. Now, on the contrary, if a prospect occurs of corn rising in price in any considerable degree, sufficient capital might and would It may be, that a certain manufacture or occupation is established in a country not possessed of any greater, or even equal, natural advantages for carrying it on, than are possessed by the country which purchases the productions of that particular occupation; in such cases there can be no doubt of its being advantageous for the latter country, to endeavour, by means of a bounty, to establish the manufacture or occupation within itself; nor should such endeavours be relaxed, until the object has been accomplished; and when the manufacture or occupation has attained to maturity, the bounty may not only be withdrawn by degrees, but all that has been expended thereon will, ultimately, be amply repaid to the community in an increase of its capital, wealth, and population. be employed on the land, the very first year, adequate to produce the required supply. By letting our poor and waste lands lay uncultivated, while the price of corn is too low to allow of their profitable cultivation, on individual account, we do not debar ourselves from having recourse to them when the price of corn rises so high as to make their cultivation advantageous; on the contrary, properly prepared new land frequently yields its best crop the first year. But our foreign enemies, who, while at peace, purchased our cloths, cottons, and hardwares, &c. with their corn, would find much more difficulty in supplying themselves with those necessary commodities, either at home or elsewhere; and clothing is, in Europe and North America, nearly as indispensible a necessary of life, or, at least, of comfortable existence, as corn. CHAPTER XXVI. GROSS AND NET INCOME. SINCE every labourer can produce a surplus, beyond his own wants, of some production or other, and as we have observed that the number of productive labourers that might be employed in a country like Britain are indefinite, it will follow, that both the gross and net income will be in proportion to the number of its productive labourers. To an individual, possessing a capital of £20,000, and whose profits are £2,000 per ann., it may be a matter quite indifferent whether his capital employed a hundred or a thousand men; whether the commodities produced sold for £10,000 or £20,000, provided his profits are, in either case, undiminished. But the real interest of the nation at large may not, in this case, coincide with that of the individual. If, for the sake of argument, we admit the assumption, that the net income of the nation, public and private, could be the same with |