2. The above hypothesis neither has existed nor could
continue. The diversity of soils and multiplicity of wants,
compel an exchange of the productions of the earth, against other
productions.
This hypothesis never can have existed, because the earth has
been cultivated before it has been divided; the cultivation
itself having been the only motive for a division, and for that
law which secures to every one his property. For the first
persons who have employed themselves in cultivation, have
probably worked as much land as their strength would permit, and,
consequently, more than was necessary for their own nourishment.
If this state could have existed, it could not possibly be
durable; each one gathering from his field only a subsistence,
and not having wherewith to pay others for their labour, would
not be enabled to supply his other wants of lodging, cloathing,
etc., except by the labour of his hands, which would be nearly
impossible, as every soil does not produce every material.
The man whose land was only fit to produce grain, and would
neither bring forth cotton or flax, would want linen to cloath
him. Another would have ground proper for cotton, which would not
yield grain. One would want wood for his fire, and another be
destitute of corn to support him. Experience would soon teach
every one what species of productions his land was best adapted
to, and he would confine himself to the cultivation of it; in
order to procure himself those things he stood in need of, by an
exchange with his neighbours, who, having on their part acquired
the same experience, would have cultivated those productions
which were best suited to their fields, and would have abandoned
the cultivation of any other.
