The action of the land is a chemical process, which so modifies the material that it multiplies it by destroying it.

The soil is then a producer of utility; and when it [the soil ?] asks its pay in the form of profit, or farm rent, for its proprietor, it at the same time gives something to the consumer in exchange for the amount which the consumer pays it.

It gives him a produced utility; and it is the production of this utility which warrants us in calling land productive, as well as labor." Let us clear up this matter.
The blacksmith who manufactures for the farmer implements of husbandry, the wheelwright who makes him a cart, the mason who builds his barn, the carpenter, the basket-maker, &c.,--all of whom contribute to agricultural production by the tools which they provide,--are producers of utility; consequently, they are entitled to a part of the products.
"Undoubtedly," says Say; "but the land also is an implement whose service must be paid for, then...." I admit that the land is an implement; but who made it?
Did the proprietor?
Did he--by the efficacious virtue of the right of property, by this MORAL QUALITY infused into the soil--endow it with vigor and fertility?
Exactly there lies the monopoly of the proprietor; in the fact that, though he did not make the implement, he asks pay for its use.

When the Creator shall present himself and claim farm-rent, we will consider the matter with him; or even when the proprietor--his pretended representative--shall exhibit his power-of-attorney.
"The proprietor's service," adds Say, "is easy, I admit." It is a frank confession.
"But we cannot disregard it.

Without property, one farmer would contend with another for the possession of a field without a proprietor, and the field would remain uncultivated...." Then the proprietor's business is to reconcile farmers by robbing them.