THE PROBLEM OF RENT 109

at any rate replaceable, but the mineral bears, in addition,
a charge for natural resources used up and not replaceable.
The price of produce, every unit of which bears a charge
additional to the expenses of winning it, must be higher
than where that charge is not imposed. So much of mining
rents or royalties as constitutes such additional charge is
a cause of an elevation of price in the produce. If it were
not charged, the amount of produce raised and placed on
the market would be increased, for some mineral, which can
return the expenses of winning it, but cannot bear charges
beyond these expenses, would be added to the supply as a
result of abolishing the charges, or deducted from the supply
if charges of this nature were imposed where none had
previously existed. In the case of agricultural land, leased
in the ordinary fashion, the remitting of rents by landlords
would not affect the intensity of cultivation of the soil, and
therefore the supply of produce.” It might do so if the
tenant had been inadequately provided with capital, for the
extra funds thus placed in his hands would render it possible
for him to improve his mode of cultivation. But, as previously
 pointed out, the conceptions relating to rent have
been worked out on the hypothesis that the farmer owns,
or can borrow, capital adequate for making the most profitable
 use of his holding. Relief from the demand for rent
would, in that case, simply give him the advantages of
ownership, and it has already been noted that the intensity
of cultivation would not be changed thereby. Some modifications
 would arise in practice from the greater willingness
to risk outlay on owned land than on hired land, to work
for more distant returns on the former than on the latter.
But, broadly speaking, the statement that the supply of
produce is not affected by the, question of whether landrent
 is paid by cultivators to others, or retained by themselves,
 may be safely made. A change of the claimants
of land-rent would, further, not affect the demand for
produce. Here, too, there are indirect effects, not entirely
negligible, and running counter to the allegation made.
A transfer of wealth from one class to another does affect
the nature of the general consumption of goods, and