_Answ._ No one proportion can be determined of; because a great alteration may be made in respect to the tenant's ability, his merit, to the time and place, and other accidents. Some tenants are so rich, as is said, that you are not bound to any abatement. Some are so bad, that you are bound to no more than strict justice and common humanity to them. Some years (like the last, when a longer drought than any man alive had known, burnt up the grass) disableth a tenant to pay his rent; some countries are so scarce of money, that a little abatement is more than in another place; but ordinarily the common sort of tenants in England should have so much abated of the fullest worth, that they may comfortably live on it, and follow their labours with cheerfulness of mind, and liberty to serve God in their families, and to mind the matters of their salvation, and not to be necessitated to such toil, and care, and pinching want, as shall make them liker slaves than freemen, and make their lives uncomfortable to them, and make them unfit to serve God in their families, and seasonably mind eternal things.
_Quest._ V. What if the landlord be in debt, or have some present want of money, may he not then raise the rent of those lands that were underlet before?
_Answ._ If his pride pretend want where there is none, (as to give extraordinary portions with his daughters, to erect sumptuous buildings, &c.) this is no good excuse for oppression. But if he really fall into want, then all that his tenants hold as mere free gifts from his liberality, he may withdraw (as being no longer able to give). But that which they had by custom an equitable title to, or by contract also a legal title to, he may not withdraw. (And yet all this is his sin, if he brought that poverty culpably on himself; it is his sin in the cause, though, supposing that cause, the raising of his rent be lawful.) But it is not every debt in a rich man, who hath other ways of paying it, which is a true necessity in this case; and if a present debt made it necessary only at that time, it is better (by fine or otherwise) make a present supply, than thereupon to lay a perpetual burden on the tenants, when the cause is ceased.
_Quest._ VI. What if there be abundance of honest people in far greater want than my tenants are, (yea, perhaps preachers of the gospel,) and I have no other way to relieve them unless I raise my rents; am I not bound rather to give to the best and poorest, than to others?
_Answ._ Yes, if it were a case that concerned mere giving; but when you must take away from one to give to another, there is more to be considered in it. Therefore in these two cases at least you may not raise your tenants' rents to relieve the best or poorest whosoever: 1. In case that he have some equitable title to your land, as upon the easier rent. 2. Or in case that the scandal of seeming injustice or cruelty, is like to do more hurt to the interest of religion and men's souls, than your relieving the poor with the addition would do good (which a prudent man by collation of probable consequents may satisfactorily discern): but if it were not only to preserve the comforts, but to save the lives of others in their present famine, nature teacheth you to take that which is truly your own, both from your tenants, and your servant, and your own mouths, to relieve men in such extreme distress; and nature will teach all men to judge it your duty, and no scandalous oppression. But when you cannot relieve the ordinary wants of the poor, without such a scandalous raising of your rents as will do more harm than your alms would do good, God doth not then call you to give such alms; but you are to be supposed to be unable.
_Quest._ VII. May I raise a tenant's rent, or turn him out of his house, because he is a bad man; by a kind of penalty?