Page images
PDF
EPUB

of the truths of abstract science: yet with all proper allowance for this cause, it is not a little surprising how widely different are the opinions which distinguished men have maintained, and that, with nearly equal success, before the people. It indicates great uncertainty and ignorance in the public mind, and arises in part from the variances, which however are more apparent than real, amongst the masters of the science themselves. The Tariff question has been argued almost exclusively as one of price, and yet, simple as this inquiry seems to be, the most serious differences exist, some contending that price is wholly regulated by the ratio between the demand and supply, others, by the cost of production, and scarcely any two agree what that cost is. Such a state of things could not exist, were a few principles distinctly agreed upon, and firmly fixed in the public mind.

The Tariff question is not merely one of price, but has, like most great public questions, an important connexion with the distribution of wealth amongst the classes of society. That so few of our public speakers have considered it in this light, is another proof that the very foundations of a science, so much appealed to, are generally unknown, or what is almost as bad, superficially known. It has accordingly seemed to us an appropriate time to call the public attention to those elementary truths, on which depend the laws of price, and of the distribution of wealth. We cannot be fitted to practice a science, except by a diligent study, and mental assimilation, so to speak, of its first principles.

Some persons have accused Political Econor. ding the wealth and weal of nations, for, say name embraces the whole science of governme pied only with the nature and causes of wealth is plain that pecuniary considerations are to be t' of the statesman. It is true, that such is the meaning of the name; but, like many other nification has been so narrowed down as to the science, which exhibits the laws of the p distribution of wealth. No one pretends that 1: the only elements of Political Philosophy.

If any Political Economists appear to justif tion to their science, by advancing its conclu exclusive rules of government, their error has by attending too little to that branch of the se treats of distribution. The production and ame.

is not so important to a nation, as the manner in which it is distributed among the several classes of society. It is this, which chiefly affects the national welfare, and concerns the justice of government; it is, so to speak, the spiritual side of Political Economy; for while the production and accumulation of wealth immediately interests the cupidity of man, on its division and distribution more directly depend his relations to his fellow beings, and the mutual rights and obligations which they beget. Though the useful and the right coincide in this case, as in most others; though the most rapid increase of national wealth will usually be accompanied by the justest distribution; yet our views of government are apt to be warped, as we have the one or the other object chiefly in view.

We propose to exhibit the laws of the distribution of wealth in such a condensed form, as our limits demand, and to compare the opinions of the principal writers. We hope to show the origin of their differences, and to determine how far they affect the certainty of the science by inquiring to what common basis of truth they should be referred. By arranging our investigation, so as to show the natural growth of the ideas, and the order in which they should spring from each other, it will be easier to avoid errors, and to detect them, if committed.

On the very threshold of the science, we are surprised at the various definitions of wealth. This, of itself, proves that our results cannot, as in Mathematics, be founded on definitions; the premises are more complex. The largest definition of wealth embraces all the objects of human desire; but this would plainly launch us forth into the great ocean of universal knowledge, and we should have to investigate the nature of the mind, all its affections and desires, and all their moral and metaphysical relations, before we could reach any conclusion. Define wealth as we may, we naturally connect it with the ideas of possession and acquisition, or to use the terms of our science, of pre duction and distribution. Viewed from this point, the objects of human desire either are supplied gratuitously in unti ted quantities by nature, or can be procure only by the exertion of some toil or labor, which wor use in its largest sensé, as applicable to all kinds of exestion, whether physical or mental. The latter class only can be the subjects of production and distribution, and consequently of

[graphic]

our science, for there can be no motive to produce by our toil, what Nature bestows without it. Now this act of production necessarily implies human labor, which may act either alone, or by the aid of some natural power or agent; and in the latter case, it may act either with or without some instrument, which must itself be the production or acquisition of former labor. A song may be said to be the production of labor acting alone, though even in that case, the sounds could not be produced without the aid of the air, which we may regard as a natural agent. The instruments, by whose intervention, labor operates on the powers of nature, are called capital; they consist of the food, which supports the laborer during his work, machinery, &c.Such in all times and countries are the agents of production; they form three great natural classes, laborers, capitalists or owners of capital, and owners of the natural agents, where these are capable of appropriation. These classes have their origin in the conditions, to which the Creator has subjected human existence, and we cannot suppose them changed, without a change in the whole constitution of nature. Our science, therefore, must determine the proportions in which wealth, the joint production of these agen cies, is distributed amongst them. This is the primary object of that branch of science, with which we are now engaged. The various ways in which these classes are blended together, and their relations changed by laws and social institutions, form a subject of inquiry, secondary in scientific order, though scarcely in importance.

The share of wealth, (and we shall confine this term to such objects, as are produced in whole or in part by labor,) which falls to labor, as its reward for aiding in production, is called wages; what remains to capital, after replacing out of its share such portions as are actually consumed 'or destroyed in the operation, is called profits; and what is p to the owner of the natural agent for its use, receives Lame of rent. This last term is often used in common

in a more restricted sense, and confined to the price for the use of land alone.

ges, profits, and rents must each be made up of one or commodities, of which it will happen that some have and others less than they desire. It has been amply prove by Dr. Smith, that the application of labor and T to any separate branches of production, or the divis

ion of labor, is necessary for any large production. In such a state of things, the receivers of wages, profits or rents can obtain the objects of their desires, or such a fair propor tion of the wealth of society, as their productive agency entitles them to, only by exchange. Whatever may be the quantity of any particular commodity which falls to wages, profits or rents, we cannot ascertain its proportion to the whole production of society, unless we know the quantity of all other commodities it will command in exchange. Therefore we must, in the outset, inquire into the laws of value, or rather of exchangeable value, for we cannot say what wages, profits or rents are, unless we know the value of the commodities in which they consist. The necessity of this preliminary investigation is still more apparent, when we reflect that capital, as well as profits, is composed of various commodities, which are usually different in kind in either instance; thus the food, which the labourer consumes, and the machinery, by which he is assisted, are usually different from the productions of his employment, as raw cotton, cloths, iron, &c. How then can any relation between profits and capital be established, unless we can discover a ratio between the various commodities, in which they consist, that is, their relative or exchangeable value?

The price or exchangeable value of any commodity is the quantity of all other commodities for which it will exchange. Its money price is the quantity of that particular commodity, called money, for which it will exchange. Its market price is the quantity of other articles it actually does exchange for, at any given time and place; it may either be a monopoly price, as when it is affected by some natural or artificial restraint, or it may be free, affected only by the laws of nature. We shall always use the term in the latter sense, unless we specially express ourselves otherwise.

The market price of any commodity is always determined by the ratio between the demand for it, and the supply, at the given time and place. Increase the demand, while the supply remains the same, or diminish the supply while the demand remains the same, and the market-price will rise, as it will fall from the opposite causes. If the supply and demand are proportionally increased or diminished the market price will remain the same. It can never rise or fall. without some change in the ratio of demand and supply. Demand does not mean merely the will to buy, for, as has

justly been observed, every peasant may be said, in this sense, to have a demand for a coach and six; but it implies also the ability, which depends on the quantity of other commodities the purchaser has to offer in exchange, and of which the seller is in want. In a small market it may happen that two commodities are present in large supplies, yet there may be no exchange, for neither of the owners may want the the goods of the other. This can scarcely happen where money is used as the instrument of exchanges, and in those large free markets which are created by the progress of society. The dependence of price on demand and supply, is nowhere more beautifully demonstrated than in the Wealth of Nations.*

But we cannot stop here; the object of our inquiry is only removed a step farther, to the causes which affect the relation of the supply to the demand. For these, we cannot fall back on human wants and desires, which would be to abandon our science for the wide fields of moral and metaphysical inquiry; for these wants may beget the will to purchase, but they do not furnish the ability, still less the supply of the object to be purchased. The basis of all value is truly an adaptation to the wants and desires of man, but that only can have exchangeable value, which is capable of transfer or exchange. Hence mental or personal gifts, which cannot be transferred, however much they may be desired, have no exchangeable value, though the right to their use, which is sometimes capable of assignment, may have. If a commodity is adapted to human wants, and so has intrinsic value, or as Dr. Smith calls it, value in use, and is at the same time capable of transfer, it is capable of having exchangeable value; yet it can have no such actual value, unless there be some motive to give other commodities in exchange for it, and this there cannot be, unless it requires some toil or labor to produce or appropriate it to our use. Air, however useful, has no exchangeable value, because no one will give any portion of his possessions or wealth for at, which it costs him no labor to acquire. Few things have greater intrinsic value, or value in use, than water, it is capable of transfer; yet in most places it has little 10 exchangeable value, because every one is supplied as much as he can want with little or no labor.

را

[ocr errors]

See particularly Book I., Chap. 7.

« PreviousContinue »