ment, and in the acquisition of a new trade, which prevents market wages from conforming to this natural equality with the same ease and rapidity as profits. In like manner, wages, in the same employment, may vary in not far distant counties of the same State, for it is difficult to transfer the supply of labor from one district to another. The laborer will surrender much, before he severs his local ties, and there is no freight so costly as that of man. Rail-roads are said to have produced a sensible change in this regard, in England, and their effects on the condition of labor, are far from being exhausted.

If we presuppose these apparent inequalities in the wages of labor, engaged in different employments, we may determine the rate of wages at any period, by the proportion between the supply of labor and capital. The more numerous the laborers in proportion to the capital, the smaller must be the dividend or wages of each individual; the fewer the laborers, the larger will be the dividend. Whatever increases capital faster than the supply of laborers, as when labor becomes more productive, increases the wages of each individual; if labor becomes less productive, wages must fall, unless the rate of the increase of the supply of labor diminishes still more than that of capital.

The wages of the individual laborer are a dividend of the whole capital, and exchangeable values of society, not merely of that circulating capital which consists of food, clothing, and similar perishable necessaries of life. Let us suppose the capitalists or owners of wealth to have exchanged with each other, until each is possessed of exactly such articles, and in such proportions, as he desires, and has the wealth to procure. There can be no motive for farther exchange, and what remains for their own personal consumption must be idle, or employ laborers in the work of production. Common day laborers, whose wages can command but a small share of the wealth of society, will of course take their dividends, wholly or chiefly, in the first necessaries of life, as food and clothing. Those whose labor is of a character to command a larger reward, will have a considerable surplus, after satisfying their hunger, and clothing their bodies. This surplus, they will take in comforts and luxuries. Were there no such objects of desire and value, they would be forced to demand their whole. wages in the shape of food, &c. This would greatly dim

inish the shares of all other classes of laborers, and soon reduce them to the most abject want. The market price of food, &c., would be raised above its natural price in relation to all other objects, a state of things, which, as we have shown, would soon correct itself, unless the supply of food, &c., was naturally or artificially limited. We have betore spoken of the consequences of such a limitation, and will again discuss it farther on.

Our conclusions are not affected by the varying proportions of fixed and circulating capital. Fixed capitals are as much parts of the exchangeable values of society, as circulating, and they are equally the objects of desire, and the fit rewards of such species of labor, as receive wages large enough to command them. They only differ from circulating capitals, in that they last longer; they are only used. because they save labor, or, in other words, render it more productive. The idea that the use of machinery and fixed capital, diminishes the demand for labor, is entirely illusory. It may be attended with such a consequence in particular places, when first introduced, and for a short time, but this effect cannot last. The use of fixed capital ultimately increases the demand for labor; it costs labor to create it, to renew it, and to increase it. Its productions are cheapened, and thereby raise the value of all other commodities, and the wages which they make up. The labor saved may be employed in producing other or new objects of desire, if no more of the commodity produced by the aid of fixed capital is required than before. But in fact, the cheapness of production always causes an increased demand, as well as supply, and the whole of the labor formerly employed, is not diverted to new channels. Nay, machinery is a substitute only, for bodily labor; it cannot supersede, but rather increases, the necessity for mental exertion, and the use of our talents. Were its use pushed to the ideal limit, when there would be no further demand for mere physical labor, the wealth of the world would be large enough to employ every one in that intellectual toil, which deservedly commands large rewards for its superior productive agency.

We said that all the wealth which remained, after supplying the personal consumption of its owners, must either lie idle, or employ labor. So long as labor continues equally productive, there can be no motive to permit any portion of wealth to remain idle and unproductive. Wealth will never VOL. XI.-NO. 21.

2

be hoarded to any appreciable amount, except under a bad government, which renders the returns of labor and capital uncertain and insecure. It is improper to consider, as unproductive or idle, the wealth which employs menial servants to the extent that they save the time of the employer, and permit him to devote his whole energies to more important occupations. There could be no statesmen, no merchants, master manufacturers, or laborers, whose toils were mental, were there no menials to save their time from the satisfaction of mere physical necessities; in this point of view, menial servants may be amongst the most productive of laborers. Nor can the capital which employs labor in producing luxuries, and works of art, as statues, pictures, and fine buildings, be regarded as unproductive. Such things are objects of desire and exchange, and if they conform to good taste, and are suited to wants, planted in the very nature of man, there will be a permanent demand for labor to renew and increase them. There may be laborers, whose productions are consumed as fast as created. Such are public singers, dancers, dramatic actors, and menial servants, kept only for luxury or ostentation. Of these we may say, as of objects of art; if the demand for such labor is founded in an abiding want of human nature, and a want is apt to be lasting in proportion as it accords with reason, it will be permanent, and the supply of labor will be so adjusted as to satisfy it. The portion of wealth which is personally consumed by its owners, without in any way employing other labor, must be comparatively small, and may properly be regarded as the wages of that species of labor which saves and preserves capital and wealth, for capitalists themselves, form part of the supply of labor in the world. It more is consumed in gluttony and waste, it has the same effect with the absolute and useless destruction of wealth. Under the same head, comes the capital which employs menial labor for purposes of senseless ostentation or luxury, or any other labor in the production of objects for which there is no real or permanent demand. Here also should be classed the capital which is employed in enterprises that fail, though these are sometimes only a part of the necessary cost of production, if we view them as experiments. It may be taken for granted, that society and individuals will be prevented, by interest, from employing any more capital in this way, than can be avoided. As to such portions of capital as em

ploy labor in foolish luxuries and extravagancies, for which there is no large or permanent demand, they can only do so, by abstracting it from the production of objects of greater intrinsic value. The wealth of society will increase less rapidly, or actually decrease, as the operation is extended farther. Objects for which there is a real, lasting, and large demand will be supplied in smaller quantities, while those, which are desired only by the depraved and ever changing tastes of a few, will be furnished in greater abundance. The self interest of society, if unimpeded by laws, will soon correct this state of things, which cannot last where men have to live by their toil, and are secure in its produce. It is the offspring of a society, where the few live on the plunder of the many; the Roman Senators, who were the greatest robbers the world has ever seen, committed the maddest extravagancies of luxury. The same train of remark will apply to extravagant personal consumption on the part of the owners of wealth. As we said above, the quantity they can consume without any employment of labor is, from its very nature, small in relation to the whole sum of wealth. The food they can eat, the clothes they can wear, the luxuries they can consume in personal use, are limited in quantity, and none but madmen can be supposed to destroy what they do not use. Wealth is possessed by its owners in various and unequal quantities, and this very inequality stimulates the small proprietor to consume less, as the large proprietor consumes more. To rise in his condition, and command the superior enjoyments of the richer consumer, he must save, which he would soon cease to do at all, if he consumed extravagantly. The wasteful consumption of some, is compensated by the frugality of others. When the natural laws of production and distribution are not opposed by human laws, an extravagant, useless and unproductive consumption through all classes of society, is a moral impossibility. Could it occur, it would not change the relative proportions of wages and wealth, if it extended to all classes in the same proportion. If it was true only of the capitalist class, the ultimate result would be that the laborers of this generation would be the capitalists of the next, and their places would be filled by the descendants of the spendthrift capitalists.

A portion of the wealth of society may employ labor in an unproductive manner, and thus be destroyed, where the

State employs its revenues disadvantageously. But the questions connected with taxation and government expendi tures, are foreign to our present inquiry, and must be separately treated.

Whatever be the natural proportion, which wages in dif ferent employments, tend to maintain to each other, they all depend on the wealth of society, as we have shown. As this wealth, or capital as it is called, when considered in relation to production, is large or small, the share or wages of the individual laborer will be large or small; if it increases faster than the supply of labor, wages will rise; if slower, they will fall. But it tends to increase exactly at the same rate, so long as labor remains equally productive, which we shall proceed to show. We will first remark, that, if the term natural price is applied to labor considered as a commodity, the natural price or wages of labor will be expressed by anything which is produced by the same or an equivalent productive agency. Now the whole mass of capital and the whole supply of labor, are both the produce of the former labor of society. The consumption of the last generation enabled it to produce at once the present capital and the present generation, or supply of labor; and when the one exchanges for the other, they may be said to be at their natural price, and we have before shown, that it is this very exchange, which determines the average and general wages of each individual laborer. This use of the term natural price may be thought to savour more of reasoning in words, than in ideas. The term was first used in reference to the exchanges of commodities for each other; but when we consider all commodities together, there is nothing for which they can be exchanged but labor, and we have to strain the meaning of our terms with great caution, when we treat labor as a commodity. We shall see the necessity of this explanation, when we come to consider the doctrines of certain authors.

We will now return to our proposition, that the supplies of labor and capital will increase at the same rate, as long as labor remains equally productive, that is, as long as every new portion of labor employed, produces as much as any equal portion formerly employed. It is obvious that production will increase exactly as fast as labor in this case, and this is but another way of saying that capital or wealth increases as fast as labor. Any other supposition is mani