« PreviousContinue »
mer days, and give a very romantic ap-
precarious. If you retort, that they deceive themselves respecting the benefits which they derive from a common, and tell them that the hours which their wife and children waste in wandering about for a few sticks or a bunch of furze, might be more profitably employed at home; or if you tell them, (as has been asserted in one of the county reports for the board of agriculture) that if one man turns a cow upon a common in the spring of the year for nothing, and his neighbour gives eighteen pence a week to some farmer for keeping in his inclosure another cow of equal value; that when both are driven to market at Michaelmas, the difference of price will more than reimburse the latter for his expence, besides the additional quantity of milk which his cow will yield, in consequence of her better food, they will laugh at your reasoning, deny the truth of your statement, and, like many wiser people, as they fancy themselves, prefer living in their error to running the risk of being undeceived to their cost. For my own part, I have always thought it rather unfeeling to make arguments for other people, and afterwards aćt upon them whether they admit their validity or not ; what folly it is to tell those poor creatures that the benefits they derive from a common are merely ideal, and therefore not worth attending to t and what cruelty it is on this account to make them relinquish their imaginary benefits, and force our own on them in exchange who is prepared to state the precise difference between a real and imaginary benefit? In short, what imaginary benefit is not real to him who enjoys it?