no presumptuous design to controvert the opinions of learned and profound writers on this subject; but merely to give my own view of the state of landed property in Europe, in times which will admit of its being compared with primitive institutions in India.

In the states of ancient Greece, land, with few exceptions, was always private property. Under a democracy it could hardly be otherwise. In the history of Attica, we meet with a fact worth remarking in this place, that, although far more populous in proportion to its extent than modern Holland, and yielding to the state a larger public revenue than any other known country,* still

66

During the Peninsular war, the revenue of Athens "amounted to 2000 talents, or 450,000l. sterling; a sum, "which making allowance for the difference in the value of money, is far beyond what was ever enjoyed by a people "possessed of so small a territory as Attica." Hill's Essays on Greece, p. 256.

66

The extent of Attica is about 70 miles long, and no where more than 60 broad; of a rocky barren soil, and at no time yielding a twentieth part of the corn necessary for the subsistence of its inhabitants. Its dense population must, therefore, have been chiefly maintained by its commerce; and if we take the value of money formerly to be only ten times as great as in the present day, we shall have 4,500,000l. as the revenue of what in modern improved times would only be called a moderate-sized province.

landed property seems, like the estates of Jenmkars formerly in Malabar, to have been held so sacred, and inviolable, as never to have been subjected to a regular land-tax.

The public revenue was derived from the following sources.

1. The annual rent of certain lands and forests belonging to the state.

2. The twenty-fourth part of the produce of silver mines in Laurium.

3. A tax levied on strangers, i. e. not citizens-Metoikoi.

4. Duties on goods sold in the marketplace.

5. A fiftieth of the value of goods exported, or imported, at the harbour of Piræus.

6. Contributions from allied or subjected

states.

7. When these heads of revenue were insufficient to defray the expences of government, magistrates were appointed, who, every fifth year, made an estimate of the property of all the citizens, and exacted from each a fiftieth, or twentieth, or twelfth part of his income, as the circumstances of the state required. Although this tax was regulated by the number of medimni of corn, which each citizen derived from his estate, it was still

nothing more or less than a regular income

tax.

8. During war, the richer citizens were expected to furnish a certain number of triremes at their own expence. About the age of Demosthenes, 120 persons were annually chosen out of each of the ten tribes; and the 1200 thus appointed, were required to pay all the extraordinary contributions demanded by the

state.

In the levy of this extraordinary contribution, a custom prevailed very similar to what still obtains with village communities in India. Of the 1200 above-mentioned, 300 of the most opulent were selected, who paid the whole contribution to government; and they were then left to divide the amount among themselves, and the other 900, according to the proportions justly demandable from each.

These, I believe, were the only taxes in the time of Solon. When Pisistratus established himself in the sovereignty of Attica, he exacted from every Athenian citizen a tenth of his income; and employed his surplus revenue in decorating Athens with magnificent buildings. One half of this tax was afterwards remitted by his son Hipparchus. This, however, was still an income-tax. After paying

it, the citizens had the secure enjoyment of all the rest of their property.*

Throughout the whole extent of the Roman empire, land was possessed by individuals in full property. A government originally republican, and consequently holding, or professing to hold, the rights of individuals sacred, never pretended to alienate, to assume, or even to participate in their possessions, further than to require, what all governments require in some shape for their support, tribute or revenue. In all their conquests the proprietary rights

In the eighth number of the Foreign Quarterly Review there is a very able article on the letting of land, in which, among other things, the state of landed property in ancient Greece is particularly referred to; and a copy is given of a very curious lease of land, granted to a farmer and his son for 40 years, at a fixed money rent, dated in the fourth year of the 108th Olympiad, or 345 years before Christ. In this article, as well as in the lease itself, the existence of private landed property in full right is abundantly confirmed; whilst it appears from the lease, that in those days land was possessed by individuals (as mentioned in the text) free of revenue or tax to the state; inasmuch as it provides for the eventual payment of a tax, should such be at any time demanded proof that no such tax existed when the lease was granted. The words of the lease are → "And if a tax should be "paid for the land to government, the said tax to be paid by "the Aexonians (proprietors), or if paid by the tenant, to be "deducted from the rent."

a

of individuals were acknowledged and confirmed. A tenth of the product of lands was demanded from provinces which sought the protection of Rome, and lands thus assessed, were called Decuman, or Decumates.* In others, imposts were levied, under the names of Stipendia, and Vectigalia; but the right of property was never questioned. Property in land, therefore, in these times, was, as in Hindoo countries, purely and universally allodial. In the Roman states, there were some public lands, and tilled on public account. From these lands, decumæ, tithes, or the tenth part of corn, and the fifth of other fruits, were demanded, as well in Italy as other parts. Those who farmed the tithes were called Decumani. The ground was also called Decumanus ;† but

Omnis ager Siciliæ decumanus est. Cicero. The country between the Rhine and the Danube, now called Suabia, had also the denomination of Decumates Agri.-Murph. Tac. vol. iv. p. 279.

+ Menu's law is, that of grain, i. e. the produce of land, onesixth, one-eighth, or one-twelfth part, according to the difference of the soil, and the labour necessary to cultivate it, may be taken by the King. Menu adds a salutary caution : -"Let the king (he says) not cut up his own root by taking

no revenue, nor the root of other men by excess of covetous"ness; for by cutting up his own root and theirs, he makes "both himself and them wretched." - Sir W. Jones' Works, vol. vii. p. 314.