species of industry which contributes to the riches of a nation. Founding on the indisputable fact, that every thing which either ministers to our wants or desires, must be originally derived from the earth, Quesnay assumed as a self-evident truth, and as the basis of his system, that the earth is the only source of wealth; and held that labour is altogether incapable of producing any new value, except when employed in agriculture, including under that term fisheries and mines. The changes produced by the powerful influence of the vegetative powers of nature, and his inability to explain the origin and causes of rent, confirmed him in this opinion. The circumstance, that of all who engage in industrious undertakings, none but the cultivators of the soil pay rent for the use of natural agents, appeared to him to prove that agriculture is the only species of industry which yields a nett surplus (produit net) over and above the expenses of production. Quesnay allowed.

that manufacturers and merchants are highly useful; but, as they realize no nett surplus in the shape of rent, he contended that the value which they add to the raw material of the commodities they manufacture, or carry from place to place, is barely equivalent to the value of the capital or stock consumed by them during the time they are necessarily engaged in these operations. These principles being established, Quesnay proceeded to divide society into three classes; the first, or productive class, by whose agency all wealth is produced, consists of the farmers and labourers engaged in agriculture, who subsist on

a portion of the produce of the land reserved to themselves as the wages of their labour, and as a reasonable profit on their capital: the second, or proprietary class, consists of those who live on the rent of the land, or on the nett surplus produce raised by the cultivators after their necessary expenses have been deducted and the third, or unproductive class, consists of manufacturers, merchants, menial servants, &c., who subsist entirely on the wages paid them by the other two classes; and whose labour, though exceedingly useful, adds nothing to the national wealth. It is obvious, supposing this classification to be made on just principles, that all taxes must fall on the landlords. The third, or unproductive class, have nothing but what they receive from the other two classes, who pay them only what is required to enable them to subsist and continue their services; and if any deduction were made from the fair and reasonable profits and wages of the husbandmen, or productive class, it would paralyze their exertions and spread poverty and misery throughout the land, by drying up the only source of wealth. Hence it necessarily follows, on this theory, that the entire expenses of government, and the various public burdens, must, however imposed, be in the end defrayed out of the produit net, or rent of the landlords; and consistently with this principle, Quesnay proposed that all the existing taxes should be repealed, and that a single tax, (impót unique,) laid directly on the nett produce, or rent, of the land, should be imposed in their stead. But, however much impressed with the importance

of agriculture over every other species of industry, Quesnay did not solicit for it any exclusive favour or protection. He successfully contended, that the interests of the agriculturists, and of all the other classes, would be best promoted by establishing a system of perfect freedom. "Qu'on maintienne," says he, in one of his general maxims, "l'entière liberté du commerce; car la police du commerce intérieur et extérieur la plus sure, la plus exacte, la plus profitable à la nation et à l'état, consiste dans LA PLEINE LIBERTÉ DE LA CONCURRENCE.” 1

Quesnay showed

that it could never be for the interest of the proprietors and cultivators of the soil to fetter or discourage the industry of merchants, artificers, and manufacturers; for the greater their liberty, the greater will be their competition, and their services will, in consequence, be rendered so much the cheaper. Neither, on the other hand, can it ever be for the interest of the unproductive classes to harass or oppress the agriculturists, by preventing the free exportation of their products, or by any sort of restrictive regulations. When the cultivators enjoy the greatest degree of freedom, their industry, and, consequently, their nett surplus produce the only fund whence any accession of national wealth can ever be derived-will be augmented to the greatest possible extent. According to this "liberal and generous system, the establishment of perfect liberty, perfect security, and perfect justice, is the 1 "Physiocratie," première partie, p. 119. "Wealth of Nations," 1 vol. 8vo, p. 303.

only, as it is the infallible, means of securing the highest degree of prosperity to all classes.

66

"On a vu," says the ablest expositor of this system, M. Mercier de la Rivière, "qu'il est de l'essence de l'ordre que l'intérêt particulier d'un seul ne puisse jamais être séparé de l'intérêt commun de tous; nous en trouvons une preuve bien convaincante dans les effets que produit naturellement et necessairement la plénitude de la liberté qui doit régner dans le commerce, pour ne point blesser la propriété. L'intérêt personnel, encouragé par cette grande liberté, presse vivement et perpétuellement chaque homme en particulier de perfectionner, de multiplier les choses dont il est vendeur; de grossir ainsi la masse des jouissances qu'il peut procurer aux autres hommes, afin de grossir, par ce moyen, la masse des jouissances que les autres hommes peuvent lui procurer en échange. Le monde alors va de lui-même; le désir de jouir, et la liberté de jouir, ne cessant de provoquer la multiplication des productions et l'accroissement de l'industrie, ils impriment à toute la société un mouvement qui devient une tendance perpetuelle vers son meilleur état possible."

As other opportunities will be afforded of examining the principles of this very ingenious theory, it is sufficient at present to remark, that, in assuming agriculture to be the only source of wealth, because the matter or substance of commodities must be originally derived from the earth, Quesnay and his

"L'Ordre Nat. et Essent. des Sociétés Politiques," ii. 444.

followers mistook altogether the nature of production, and really supposed wealth to consist of matter; whereas, in its natural state, matter is very rarely possessed of any immediate or direct utility, and is invariably destitute of value. The labour required to appropriate matter, and to fit and prepare it for our use, is the only means by which it acquires value, and becomes wealth. The latter is not produced by making any additions to the matter of our globe, that being a quantity susceptible neither of augmentation nor diminution. All the operations of industry are intended to create wealth by giving utility to matter already in existence; and it will be afterwards seen, that the labour employed in manufactures and commerce is, in all respects, as creative of utility, and consequently of wealth, as the labour employed in agriculture. Neither is the cultivation of the soil, as M. Quesnay supposed, the only species of industry which yields a surplus after the expenses of production are deducted. So long as none but the best of the good soils are cultivated, no rent, or produit net, is obtained from the land; and it is only after recourse has been had to poorer soils, and when, consequently, the productive powers of the labour and capital employed in cultivation begin to diminish, that rent begins to appear: so that, instead of being a consequence of the superior productiveness of agricultural industry, rent is in fact a consequence of one piece of land being more productive than others!

The "Tableau Economique," comprising a set of formulæ constructed by M. Quesnay, intended to

E