an equivalent proposition, is frequently opposed to the first, and, consequently, quite inaccurate, that the science is indebted for one of its greatest improvements.

In stating that the quantity of labour required to produce commodities is at once the only determining principle and measure of their real, and, generally speaking, also of their exchangeable value, it is taken for granted, of course, that all sorts of labour are reduced to the same common standard of intensity. The inequalities in the physical force of those individuals who have attained to their full growth, and who are perfectly formed, are in themselves immaterial, and entirely disappear when considered in a general point of view. Suppose the work performed by the generality of full grown men in a given time to amount to any certain quantity (x): if, on the one hand, the labour of a few individuals should amount to a little more than this common quantity (to x+1 or x+&c.,) it is abundantly certain, that the labour of as many will, on the other hand, fall as much short of it, (to

x

x

15'

x

x

IO' or x, &c.) And, therefore, whatever excess may obtain among one set of labourers being fully balanced by a corresponding deficiency among another set, it is plain that the common and average real value of all sorts of commodities will be precisely proportioned to, or coincident with, the common and average quantities of labour required for their production.

It will be shown, in the next section, that the circumstance of certain sorts of labour being of the description which is called skilled, and of their being paid at a higher rate than those common sorts that all may perform, depends on principles which do not in any degree affect the correctness of the principle we have been endeavouring to establish with respect to the real value of commodities.

The result of these investigations may be thus briefly recapitulated :— I. That no commodity is possessed of either real or exchangeable value, unless it is in demand, and unless some portion of voluntary human labour has been required for its production or appropriation.

II. That a commodity which is possessed of real must also be possessed of exchangeable value, and conversely.

III. That the real value of a commodity is always dependent on, and exactly proportioned to, the quantity of labour required for its production or appropriation.

IV. That the exchangeable value of a commodity is dependent on, and exactly proportioned to, the quantity of any other commodity, or of labour, for which it will exchange.

But though all commodities possessed of real must also be possessed of exchangeable value, the proportion which the one bears to the other is, owing to the operation of monopolies, and of changes in the rela

tion of the demand for commodities to the supply, susceptible of very great variation. If a bushel of wheat and a yard of cloth are each produced by equal quantities of labour, they will be of the same real value; but either an actual or an apprehended scarcity would have the effect to make the exchangeable value of corn, or its power of exchanging for, or buying other things, greatly exceed that of cloth; while, on the other hand, an unusually abundant harvest, or an unusual demand for cloth, would have the effect to raise its exchangeable value in relation to corn. And hence it is obvious, that though a commodity did exist, requiring at all times the same quantity of labour for its production, it would not, as has been sometimes supposed, form a standard by which to measure variations in the exchangeable value of other commodities, or of labour. For, its value in exchange might vary from the influence of causes affecting itself, though intrinsic to, and not dependent on the quantity of labour required for its production; or it might vary from similar causes, operating on the commodity with which it was to be compared. If A was always produced by the same quantity of labour, and if B and C were produced by varying quantities of labour, then, if value in exchange depended on nothing else but quantities of labour, or if it always bear the same proportion to these quantities, we should be able, by comparing B and C with A, to say at once, whether their value had remained constant, or to point out the precise extent to which it had varied. But, when there are other causes which may affect the value of A itself, as well as the values of B and C, it is obvious we should not be able, by merely comparing A with the others, to say if a variation took place in the relation that had formerly obtained amongst them, whether it had been occasioned by causes exclusively affecting A, or exclusively affecting B and C, or whether they had all been affected, though in different degrees.

But, though it is quite visionary to expect to find what cannot possibly exist an invariable standard of exchangeable value, it is not so difficult as might, at first, be supposed, to trace all variations in the exchangeable value of commodities to their proper source. The discrepancies that obtain between the real and exchangeable value of commodities, are not arbitrary and capricious. They all depend on a very few principles whose operation and effect admit of being clearly exhibited and defined. And when this is done, the proportion which the exchangeable value of a commodity bears to its real value, at any given period, may be easily determined.

Having premised these observations on value, I shall now proceed to investigate the laws which govern the distribution of the productions of art and industry among the different classes of the society, and the circumstances which determine their exchangeable value in the different stages of its progress.

SECTION II.-Classes among which the Produce of Industry is divided -Equality of Wages in all the Different Departments of IndustryEquality of Profits-Capitals of every degree of Durability. THE inhabitants of such countries as have made any considerable progress in civilization and the arts, are generally divided into the three classes of labourers, capitalists, and landlords; and whatever may be the condition of any society-whether it is rude or refined, rich or poor -every person belonging to it, who is not a pauper, or who does not subsist on the bounty of others, must be reckoned in one or other of these classes. Public functionaries of all sorts, and the various individuals engaged in what are called liberal or learned professions, exchange their services for valuable considerations. The whole subsistence of such persons is derived from wages; and they are as evidently labourers as if they handled a spade or a plough. It is to these three classes, therefore, that all the wealth of the world must primarily belong. And hence it is, that the inquiry, with respect to its distribution, really resolves itself into an investigation of the laws which regulate rent, wages, and profits.

The differences in the wages paid to the labourers engaged in different employments, and the different rates of profit which the capitals invested in them yield to those who carry them on, appear, at first sight, to oppose an insuperable obstacle to the establishment of any principles that should be generally applicable to them all. Such, however, is not the case. The differences in question are apparent only. They consist wholly of variations in the amount of money, or commodities paid to the labourer, or in the rate of gross profit accruing to the capitalist. But, when the other considerations affecting wages are taken into account, it will be found that they are really the same, or very nearly the same, at any given period, in every employment; and it will also be found, notwithstanding the differences in the rate of gross profit, that the rate of net profit is the same at any given period in all employments; or that the variations are very trifling.

I. EQUALITY OF THE WAGES OF LABOUR IN DIFFERENT EMPLOYMENTS.-If all employments were equally agreeable and healthy, if the labour to be performed in each of them was of the same intensity, and if they all required the same degree of dexterity and skill on the part of the labourer, it is evident, supposing industry to be quite free, there could be no permanent or considerable difference in the rate of wages paid to the labourers engaged in different businesses: For if, on the one hand, those employed in a particular business were to earn more than their neighbours, there would be an influx of labourers into that particular business, until the increased number of hands had reduced wages to their common level; and if, on the other hand, those employed in a particular business were to earn less than their neighbours, there would be an efflux of labourers from it, until in conse

quence of the diminished number of hands, wages had been raised to the same level. In point of fact, however, the intensity of the labour to be performed in different employments, the degree of skill required to carry them on, their healthiness, and the estimation in which they are held, differ exceedingly; and these varying circumstances necessarily occasion proportional differences in the rate of wages paid to different classes of workmen. Wages are a compensation given to the labourer for the exertion of his physical powers, or of his skill, or ingenuity. They must, therefore, vary according to the greater severity of the labour to be performed, and to the degree of skill and ingenuity required. A jeweller or engraver, for example, must be paid a higher rate of wages than a common servant or a scavenger. A long course of training is necessary to instruct a man in the business of jewelling and engraving; and if the cost of his training were not made up to him in a higher rate of wages, he would, instead of learning so difficult an art, addict himself, in preference, to such employments as hardly require any instruction. Hence it is that the discrepancies that actually obtain in the rate of wages are all confined within certain limits-increasing or diminishing it only so far as may be necessary fully to equalize the unfavourable or favourable circumstances attending any employment.

The following have been stated by Adam Smith, as the principal circumstances which occasion the rate of wages in some employments either to fall below, or rise above the general average rate of wages

I. The agreeableness and disagreeableness of the employments: II. The easiness or cheapness, or the difficulty and expence of learning them :

III. The constancy or inconstancy of the employments:

IV. The small or great trust that must be reposed in those who carry them on :

V. The probability or improbability of succeeding in them.

I. The agreeableness of an employment may arise either from physical or moral causes-from the lightness of the labour to be performed, its healthiness or cleanliness, the degree of estimation in which it is held, &c.; and its disagreeableness will arise from the opposite circumstances-from the severity of the labour to be performed, its unhealthiness or dirtiness, the degree of odium attached to it, &c. The rate of wages must obviously vary proportionally to the variations in circumstances exerting so powerful an influence over the labourer. It is indeed quite out of the question to suppose, that any individual should ever be so blind to his own interest, as to engage in an occupation considered as mean and disreputable, or where the labour is severe, if he obtain only the same rate of wages that is obtained by those engaged in employments in higher estimation, and where the labour to be performed is comparatively light. The labour of the

ploughman is not unhealthy, nor is it either irksome or disagreeable; but being more severe than that of the shepherd, it is uniformly better rewarded. The same principle holds universally. Miners, gilders, type-founders, smiths, distillers, and all who carry on unhealthy, disagreeable, and dangerous businesses, invariably obtain higher wages than those artificers who have equal skill, but who are engaged in more desirable employments. The unfavourable opinion entertained respecting some businesses, has a similar effect on wages, as if the labour to be performed in them were unusually unhealthy or severe. The trade of a butcher, for example, is generally looked upon as rather low and discreditable; and this feeling occasions such a disinclination on the part of young men to enter it, as can only be overcome by the high wages that butchers are said to earn, notwithstanding the lightness of their labour: This also is the reason that the keeper of a small inn or tavern, who is never master of his own house, and who is exposed to the brutality of every drunkard, exercises one of the most profitable of the common trades. The contrary circumstances have contrary effects. Hunting and fishing form, in an advanced state of society, among the most agreeable amusements of the rich; but from their being held in this degree of estimation, and from the lightness of their labour, those who practise them as a trade generally receive very small wages, and are proverbially poor: And the agreeableness and healthiness of the employments, rather than the lightness of their labour, or the little skill which they require, seem to be the principal cause of the redundant numbers and consequent low wages of common farm-servants, and generally of all workmen employed in ordinary field labour.

The severe discipline and various hardships to which common soldiers are exposed, and the little chance they have of arriving at a higher station, are unfavourable circumstances, which, it might have been supposed, would have required a very high rate of wages to counterbalance. It is found, however, that there are really very few common trades in which labourers can be procured for so small a rate of wages as that for which recruits are willing to enlist in the army. Nor is it difficult to discover the causes of this apparent anomaly. Except when actually engaged in warlike operations, a soldier is comparatively idle; while his free, dissipated, and generally adventurous life, the splendour of his uniform, the imposing spectacle of military parades and evolutions, and the martial music by which they are accompanied, exert a most seductive influence over the young and inconsiderate. The dangers and privations of campaigns are undervalued, while the chances of advancement are proportionally exaggerated in their sanguine and heated imaginations. Without regarding the danger,' says Adam Smith, 'soldiers are never obtained so easily as at the beginning of a new war; and though they have scarce any chance of preferment, they figure to themselves, in their youthful fancies, a