John Stuart Mill’s involvement with the Land Question in Ireland is analyzed from the viewpoint of his theory of institutions. I argue that, for Mill, institutions should promote progress without endangering social order. When referring to economic institutions, “progress” meant, essentially, human improvement, a rise in economic productivity, and the increase of social justice. According to Mill, the cottier system did not fulfill any of these requisites and should be abandoned. Mill also rejected transposing to Ireland the “English model” of capitalist agriculture. This institution could eventually solve the economic problem but involved the unjust eviction of tenants and would not regenerate the Irish character. Given the particularities of Ireland, Mill endorsed peasant property as the most suitable form of land appropriation. It would, at the same time, improve the character of the people, enhance productivity, and increase the social justice of the system. It would also mitigate the conflicts that jeopardized social order.

中文翻译：

---

约翰·斯图尔特·米尔和爱尔兰土地问题：他对社会制度的看法的说明

约翰·斯图尔特·密尔对爱尔兰土地问题的参与从他的制度理论的角度进行了分析。我认为，对于密尔来说，制度应该在不危及社会秩序的情况下促进进步。当提到经济制度时，“进步”本质上意味着人类的进步、经济生产力的提高和社会正义的提高。根据米尔的说法，科蒂尔系统没有满足任何这些要求，应该被放弃。穆勒还拒绝将资本主义农业的“英国模式”移植到爱尔兰。该机构最终可以解决经济问题，但涉及对租户的不公正驱逐，不会重生爱尔兰人的性格。鉴于爱尔兰的特殊性，密尔认为农民财产是最合适的土地占有形式。它会，同时，改善人的品格，提高生产力，增加系统的社会公正性。它还将减轻危害社会秩序的冲突。