The Van Rennselaer Estate

Seriotis disturba rices have recenüy tnken pbice omong the tenants of the vast lancled e6tato, which embraces n large portion of three of ihe Counties of New York. As many of our readers are ignorant of the merits of the conroversy bet'veen the Tenants and Juudholders wo subjoin the foilowing from Neal's Gazette . "A portion of Columbia county, and nearly all of Albany and Rennselaer counties belontid to the estáte of the Patroon, who dieü lately leaving his vast inheritance to be divided bëtvveen nis two sons. The funïily is of Dutch origio, and took up tho land in dispute about 200 years ago, obtaining their title frora the State of Holland, tlien in possession of New York. When that province was conquered by the EDgli&h, the property of the Van Reniieelaers was oonfirmed to them; and, subsequently, on he revolt of the colonies, nnd the adoptior. of a revised crnstitution for New York, the üile was igain acknovviedged. The claim of ihe farhily is, iheréfóré, indefeasible; no landholder in Amarica has a better title than Mr. Van Rennselaer, and few have EO good a one. Most of this vast property is leased out on long terms, according to a lenure much used nt the time the Iea6es originated. In consideraiion thot all mines and etríams of viaterbe reterved to the landlord, and that whenever a tenant paifs with his leosesexcept by will,one fonrth óf the price be paid to the Van Rennselaers, tbe rent wbs almost DOinina), being, on an average eleven bushels of wheat for every hundred ncres, four fowls, a day's service of .horsës and wagon, and the psyment of si' axes. Thia lenine and mode of payittg ent, it must Lo remembered, va9 adopted vlien money was scarce, and was the mort :onvenient thcn tho direct method now n ïse. Butagainst ihis tenurelhe lenantscomplain ccustomed only to pay u sliglit rem yeaily, .liey feel more ocu'.ejy the vexatious portiun f the tenure which compelió tlicni, on selling ,heir lease, to pay one fourth of the rnoney to ;heir laudlorcï . Kis light to the sfreasis and iiills is also a constant eyesore. Moreovcr, imongthe poorer tenants large arrenrasfes of rent have accotmilatisd- for the old Putroon, wbo adminisiered the estáte for more than half a cetuury, was a Jenient tnan. All these [hinys have conspired to créate the impression on the tentints.' minds timt they are hardly dealt, wi'.h.ifa officor is sent to diötrain for rent. They look only ni the fact, tljat they and their fathors hnve been in possession of the farms thoy hold, for more than a century, and that during this period, the aggregnle rent has amouníed to t!ie value of the land. But they forget that this rent haa not equaled, ycar in and year out, five per cent. on the value of she pi-operty; and that the same doctrine they urge would justify a State, or private individual, in refusing Jonger to pay interest for a debt, after they had enjoycd the loan for sixteen year?, in which ppriod, at six percent., theaggregaie annua! interest will amount to the principal. Yet such a doctriue would be considered preposterous. On tle part of the proprietors it is oQVred to cancel the leasea in the vvhole nianor. - The principies 011 which Ihis chango ought to be made, aro substantially admitled by bolh parties, viz: The whent rent to be convertedinto a money rent, ai:d the farms to be chased if dcsired, at the suni, of which the money rene, at a given per cení is the interest. But a difilculty ariseg in carrying oOt this plan - for the parties disagree as to the priceot which Ihe wheat ought tö be estimated, and also as to the per cent., which the principal ought to bear. The proprietors are willing to lake the average price of wheat for the last ten years, which is about $4,25 per bushei . The tenants refuse to a'low more than 75 cents to $1. In regard tó the principal, w!:ich ought to be considered the prico of the farm on the new arrangement, the proprietors 'think it ought to be estimated as hearing 5 per cent., while the tenants think it ought to be estimated at 7 per cent The differerce between the two is, that at the lamllord's valuation, the lmd wonld bring about S4 per acre: nt the tenant's valuaticn, $2. But ibe average at vvhich the tenants hitherto have sold their farms, subject to the anrntal rent, hos been 25 00 per acre. It eeems to us, after o careful examination of the subject, that not on!y right, but equity, is on the side of the landlords.