23(5 Til K NATURK AND CAUSES OK

takes place: so neither is their high value, or the low moneyprice either of goods in general, or of com in particular, anyproof of its poverty and barbarism.

But though the low money price either of goods in general,or of com in particular, be no proof of the poverty or barba-rism of the times, the low money price of some particularsorts of goods, such as cattle, poultry, game of all kinds, &c.in proportion to that of corn, is a most decisive one. It clearlydemonstrates, first, their great abundance in proportion tothat of corn, and consequently the great extent of the landwhich they occupied in proportion to what was occupied bycorn; and, secondly, the low value of this land in proportionto that of corn land, and consequently the uncultivated andunimproved state of the far greater part of the lands of thecountry. It clearly demonstrates that the stock and popu-lation of the countity did not bear the same proportion to theextent of its territory, which they commonly do in civilizedcountries, and that society was at that time, and in that coun-try, but in its infancy. From the high or low money priceeither of goods in general, or of corn in particular, we caninfer only that the mines which at that time happened tosupply the commercial world with gold and silver, were fer-tile or barren, not that the country was rich or poor. Butfrom the high or low money price of some sorts of goods inproportion to that of others, we can infer, with a degree ofprobability that approaches almost to certainty, that it wasrich or poor, that the greater part of its lands were improvedor unimproved, and that it was either in a more or less bar-barous state, or in a more or less civilized one.

Any rise in the money price of goods which proceeded al-together from the degradation of the value of silver, wouldaffect all sorts of goods equally, and raise their price univer-sally a third, or a fourth, or a fifth part higher, according assilver happened to lose a third, or a fourth, or a fifth part ofits former value. But the rise in the price of provisions,which has been the subject of so much reasoning and con-versation, does not affect all sorts of provisions equally.Taking the course of the present century at an average, theprice of corn, it is acknowledged, even by those who accountfor this rise by the degradation of the value of silver, has risenmuch less than that of some other sorts of provisions. Therise in the price of those other sorts of provisions, therefore,cannot be owing altogether to the degradation of the value oi