CHAPTER14
　　MrGodwin’sfivepropositionsrespectingpoliticaltruth，onwhichhiswholeworkhinges，notestablished—Reasonswehaveforsupposing，fromthedistressoccasionedbytheprincipleofpopulation，thatthevicesandmoralweaknessofmancanneverbewhollyeradicated—Perfectibility，inthesenseinwhichMrGodwinusestheterm，notapplicabletoman—Natureoftherealperfectibilityofmanillustrated。
　　IFthereasoningsoftheprecedingchapterarejust，thecorollariesrespectingpoliticaltruth，whichMrGodwindrawsfromthepropositionthatthevoluntaryactionsofmenoriginateintheiropinions，willnotappeartobeclearlyestablished。
　　Thesecorollariesare，’Soundreasoningandtruth，whenadequatelycommunicated，mustalwaysbevictoriousovererror：
　　Soundreasoningandtrutharecapableofbeingsocommunicated：
　　Truthisomnipotent：Thevicesandmoralweaknessofmanarenotinvincible：Manisperfectible，orinotherwords，susceptibleofperpetualimprovement。’33
　　Thefirstthreepropositionsmaybeconsideredacompletesyllogism。Ifbyadequatelycommunicated，bemeantsuchaconvictionastoproduceanadequateeffectupontheconduct，themajormaybeallowedandtheminordenied。Theconsequent，ortheomnipotenceoftruth，ofcoursefallstotheground。Ifby’adequatelycommunicated’bemeantmerelytheconvictionoftherationalfaculty，themajormustbedenied，theminorwillbeonlytrueincasescapableofdemonstration，andtheconsequentequallyfalls。ThefourthpropositionMrGodwincallstheprecedingproposition，withaslightvariationinthestatement。
　　Ifso，itmustaccompanytheprecedingpropositioninitsfall。
　　Butitmaybeworthwhiletoinquire，withreferencetotheprincipalargumentofthisessay，intotheparticularreasonswhichwehaveforsupposingthatthevicesandmoralweaknessofmancanneverbewhollyovercomeinthisworld。
　　Man，accordingtoMrGodwin，isacreatureformedwhatheisbythesuccessiveimpressionswhichhehasreceived，fromthefirstmomentthatthegermfromwhichhesprungwasanimated。
　　Couldhebeplacedinasituation，wherehewassubjecttonoevilimpressionswhatever，thoughitmightbedoubtedwhetherinsuchasituationvirtuecouldexist，vicewouldcertainlybebanished。ThegreatbentofMrGodwin’sworkonPoliticalJustice，ifIunderstanditrightly，istoshewthatthegreaterpartofthevicesandweaknessesofmenproceedfromtheinjusticeoftheirpoliticalandsocialinstitutions，andthatifthesewereremovedandtheunderstandingsofmenmoreenlightened，therewouldbelittleornotemptationintheworldtoevil。Asithasbeenclearlyproved，however，（atleastasI
　　think）thatthisisentirelyafalseconception，andthat，independentofanypoliticalorsocialinstitutionswhatever，thegreaterpartofmankind，fromthefixedandunalterablelawsofnature，musteverbesubjecttotheeviltemptationsarisingfromwant，besidesotherpassions，itfollowsfromMrGodwin’sdefinitionofmanthatsuchimpressions，andcombinationsofimpressions，cannotbeafloatintheworldwithoutgeneratingavarietyofbadmen。AccordingtoMrGodwin’sownconceptionoftheformationofcharacter，itissurelyasimprobablethatundersuchcircumstancesallmenwillbevirtuousasthatsixeswillcomeupahundredtimesfollowinguponthedice。Thegreatvarietyofcombinationsuponthediceinarepeatedsuccessionofthrowsappearstomenotinaptlytorepresentthegreatvarietyofcharacterthatmustnecessarilyexistintheworld，supposingeveryindividualtobeformedwhatheisbythatcombinationofimpressionswhichhehasreceivedsincehisfirstexistence。Andthiscomparisonwill，insomemeasure，shewtheabsurdityofsupposing，thatexceptionswilleverbecomegeneralrules;thatextraordinaryandunusualcombinationswillbefrequent;orthattheindividualinstancesofgreatvirtuewhichhadappearedinallagesoftheworldwilleverprevailuniversally。
　　IamawarethatMrGodwinmightsaythatthecomparisonisinonerespectinaccurate，thatinthecaseofthedice，theprecedingcauses，orratherthechancesrespectingtheprecedingcauses，werealwaysthesame，andthat，therefore，Icouldhavenogoodreasonforsupposingthatagreaternumberofsixeswouldcomeupinthenexthundredtimesofthrowingthanintheprecedingsamenumberofthrows。But，thatmanhadinsomesortapowerofinfluencingthosecausesthatformedcharacter，andthateverygoodandvirtuousmanthatwasproduced，bytheinfluencewhichhemustnecessarilyhave，ratherincreasedtheprobabilitythatanothersuchvirtuouscharacterwouldbegenerated，whereasthecomingupofsixesuponthediceonce，wouldcertainlynotincreasetheprobabilityoftheircomingupasecondtime。I
　　admitthisobjectiontotheaccuracyofthecomparison，butitisonlypartiallyvalid。Repeatedexperiencehasassuredus，thattheinfluenceofthemostvirtuouscharacterwillrarelyprevailagainstverystrongtemptationstoevil。Itwillundoubtedlyaffectsome，butitwillfailwithamuchgreaternumber。HadMrGodwinsucceededinhisattempttoprovethatthesetemptationstoevilcouldbytheexertionsofmanberemoved，Iwouldgiveupthecomparison;oratleastallow，thatamanmightbesofarenlightenedwithregardtothemodeofshakinghiselbow，thathewouldbeabletothrowsixeseverytime。Butaslongasagreatnumberofthoseimpressionswhichformcharacter，likethenicemotionsofthearm，remainabsolutelyindependentofthewillofman，thoughitwouldbetheheightoffollyandpresumptiontoattempttocalculatetherelativeproportionsofvirtueandviceatthefutureperiodsoftheworld，itmaybesafelyassertedthatthevicesandmoralweaknessofmankind，takeninthemass，areinvincible。
　　Thefifthpropositionisthegeneraldeductionfromthefourformerandwillconsequentlyfall，asthefoundationswhichsupportithavegivenway。InthesenseinwhichMrGodwinunderstandstheterm’perfectible’，theperfectibilityofmancannotbeasserted，unlesstheprecedingpropositionscouldhavebeenclearlyestablished。Thereis，however，onesense，whichthetermwillbear，inwhichitis，perhaps，just。Itmaybesaidwithtruththatmanisalwayssusceptibleofimprovement，orthatthereneverhasbeen，orwillbe，aperiodofhishistory，inwhichhecanbesaidtohavereachedhispossibleacmeofperfection。Yetitdoesnotbyanymeansfollowfromthis，thatoureffortstoimprovemanwillalwayssucceed，oreventhathewillevermake，inthegreatestnumberofages，anyextraordinarystridestowardsperfection。Theonlyinferencethatcanbedrawnisthatthepreciselimitofhisimprovementcannotpossiblybeknown。AndIcannothelpagainremindingthereaderofadistinctionwhich，itappearstome，oughtparticularlytobeattendedtointhepresentquestion：Imean，theessentialdifferencethereisbetweenanunlimitedimprovementandanimprovementthelimitofwhichcannotbeascertained。Theformerisanimprovementnotapplicabletomanunderthepresentlawsofhisnature。Thelatter，undoubtedly，isapplicable。
　　Therealperfectibilityofmanmaybeillustrated，asIhavementionedbefore，bytheperfectibilityofaplant。Theobjectoftheenterprisingfloristis，asIconceive，tounitesize，symmetry，andbeautyofcolour。Itwouldsurelybepresumptuousinthemostsuccessfulimprovertoaffirm，thathepossessedacarnationinwhichthesequalitiesexistedinthegreatestpossiblestateofperfection。Howeverbeautifulhisflowermaybe，othercare，othersoil，orothersuns，mightproduceonestillmorebeautiful。
　　Yet，althoughhemaybeawareoftheabsurdityofsupposingthathehasreachedperfection，andthoughhemayknowbywhatmeansheattainedthatdegreeofbeautyintheflowerwhichheatpresentpossesses，yethecannotbesurethatbypursuingsimilarmeans，ratherincreasedinstrength，hewillobtainamorebeautifulblossom。Byendeavouringtoimproveonequality，hemayimpairthebeautyofanother。Therichermouldwhichhewouldemploytoincreasethesizeofhisplantwouldprobablyburstthecalyx，anddestroyatonceitssymmetry。Inasimilarmanner，theforcingmanureusedtobringabouttheFrenchRevolution，andtogiveagreaterfreedomandenergytothehumanmind，hasburstthecalyxofhumanity，therestrainingbondofallsociety;and，howeverlargetheseparatepetalshavegrown，howeverstrongly，orevenbeautifully，afewofthemhavebeenmarked，thewholeisatpresentaloose，deformed，disjointedmass，withoutunion，symmetry，orharmonyofcolouring。
　　Wereitofconsequencetoimprovepinksandcarnations，thoughwecouldhavenohopeofraisingthemaslargeascabbages，wemightundoubtedlyexpect，bysuccessiveefforts，toobtainmorebeautifulspecimensthanweatpresentpossess。Nopersoncandenytheimportanceofimprovingthehappinessofthehumanspecies。Everytheleastadvanceinthisrespectishighlyvaluable。Butanexperimentwiththehumanraceisnotlikeanexperimentuponinanimateobjects。Theburstingofaflowermaybeatrifle。Anotherwillsoonsucceedit。Buttheburstingofthebondsofsocietyissuchaseparationofpartsascannottakeplacewithoutgivingthemostacutepaintothousands：andalongtimemayelapse，andmuchmiserymaybeendured，beforethewoundgrowsupagain。
　　AsthefivepropositionswhichIhavebeenexaminingmaybeconsideredasthecornerstonesofMrGodwin’sfancifulstructure，and，indeed，asexpressingtheaimandbentofhiswholework，howeverexcellentmuchofhisdetachedreasoningmaybe，hemustbeconsideredashavingfailedinthegreatobjectofhisundertaking。Besidesthedifficultiesarisingfromthecompoundnatureofman，whichhehasbynomeanssufficientlysmoothed，theprincipalargumentagainsttheperfectibilityofmanandsocietyremainswholeandunimpairedfromanythingthathehasadvanced。AndasfarasIcantrustmyownjudgement，thisargumentappearstobeconclusive，notonlyagainsttheperfectibilityofman，intheenlargedsenseinwhichMrGodwinunderstandstheterm，butagainstanyverymarkedandstrikingchangeforthebetter，intheformandstructureofgeneralsociety;bywhichImeananygreatanddecidedameliorationoftheconditionofthelowerclassesofmankind，themostnumerous，and，consequently，inageneralviewofthesubject，themostimportantpartofthehumanrace。WereItoliveathousandyears，andthelawsofnaturetoremainthesame，Ishouldlittlefear，orratherlittlehope，acontradictionfromexperienceinassertingthatnopossiblesacrificesorexertionsoftherich，inacountrywhichhadbeenlonginhabited，couldforanytimeplacethelowerclassesofthecommunityinasituationequal，withregardtocircumstances，tothesituationofthecommonpeopleaboutthirtyyearsagointhenorthernStatesofAmerica。
　　ThelowerclassesofpeopleinEuropemayatsomefutureperiodbemuchbetterinstructedthantheyareatpresent;theymaybetaughttoemploythelittlesparetimetheyhaveinmanybetterwaysthanattheale—house;theymayliveunderbetterandmoreequallawsthantheyhaveeverhithertodone，perhaps，inanycountry;andIevenconceiveitpossible，thoughnotprobablethattheymayhavemoreleisure;butitisnotinthenatureofthingsthattheycanbeawardedsuchaquantityofmoneyorsubsistenceaswillallowthemalltomarryearly，inthefullconfidencethattheyshallbeabletoprovidewitheaseforanumerousfamily。
　　CHAPTER15
　　Modelstooperfectmaysometimesratherimpedethanpromoteimprovement—MrGodwin’sessayon’AvariceandProfusion’—
　　Impossibilityofdividingthenecessarylabourofasocietyamicablyamongall—Invectivesagainstlabourmayproducepresentevil，withlittleornochanceofproducingfuturegood—Anaccessiontothemassofagriculturallabourmustalwaysbeanadvantagetothelabourer。
　　MRGODWINintheprefacetohisEnquirer，dropsafewexpressionswhichseemtohintatsomechangeinhisopinionssincehewrotethePoliticalJustice;andasthisisaworknowofsomeyearsstanding，IshouldcertainlythinkthatIhadbeenarguingagainstopinionswhichtheauthorhadhimselfseenreasontoalter，butthatinsomeoftheessaysoftheEnquirer，MrGodwin’speculiarmodeofthinkingappearsinasstrikingalightasever。
　　Ithasbeenfrequentlyobservedthatthoughwecannothopetoreachperfectioninanything，yetthatitmustalwaysbeadvantageoustoustoplacebeforeoureyesthemostperfectmodels。Thisobservationhasaplausibleappearance，butisveryfarfrombeinggenerallytrue。Ievendoubtitstruthinoneofthemostobviousexemplificationsthatwouldoccur。Idoubtwhetheraveryyoungpainterwouldreceivesomuchbenefit，fromanattempttocopyahighlyfinishedandperfectpicture，asfromcopyingonewheretheoutlinesweremorestronglymarkedandthemanneroflayingonthecolourswasmoreeasilydiscoverable。Butincaseswheretheperfectionofthemodelisaperfectionofadifferentandsuperiornaturefromthattowardswhichweshouldnaturallyadvance，weshallnotalwaysfailinmakinganyprogresstowardsit，butweshallinallprobabilityimpedetheprogresswhichwemighthaveexpectedtomakehadwenotfixedoureyesuponsoperfectamodel。Ahighlyintellectualbeing，。exemptfromtheinfirmcallsofhungerorsleep，isundoubtedlyamuchmoreperfectexistencethanman，butweremantoattempttocopysuchamodel，hewouldnotonlyfailinmakinganyadvancestowardsit;butbyunwiselystrainingtoimitatewhatwasinimitable，hewouldprobablydestroythelittleintellectwhichhewasendeavouringtoimprove。
　　TheformandstructureofsocietywhichMrGodwindescribesisasessentiallydistinctfromanyformsofsocietywhichhavehithertoprevailedintheworldasabeingthatcanlivewithoutfoodorsleepisfromaman。Byimprovingsocietyinitspresentform，wearemakingnomoreadvancestowardssuchastateofthingsashepicturesthanweshouldmakeapproachestowardsaline，withregardtowhichwewerewalkingparallel。Thequestion，therefore，iswhether，bylookingtosuchaformofsocietyasourpolarstar，wearelikelytoadvanceorretardtheimprovementofthehumanspecies？MrGodwinappearstometohavedecidedthisquestionagainsthimselfinhisessayon’AvariceandProfusion’intheEnquirer。
　　DrAdamSmithhasveryjustlyobservedthatnationsaswellasindividualsgrowrichbyparsimonyandpoorbyprofusion，andthat，therefore，everyfrugalmanwasafriendandeveryspendthriftanenemytohiscountry。Thereasonhegivesisthatwhatissavedfromrevenueisalwaysaddedtostock，andisthereforetakenfromthemaintenanceoflabourthatisgenerallyunproductiveandemployedinthemaintenanceoflabourthatrealizesitselfinvaluablecommodities。Noobservationcanbemoreevidentlyjust。ThesubjectofMrGodwin’sessayisalittlesimilarinitsfirstappearance，butinessenceisasdistinctaspossible。Heconsidersthemischiefofprofusionasanacknowledgedtruth，andthereforemakeshiscomparisonbetweentheavariciousman，andthemanwhospendshisincome。ButtheavariciousmanofMrGodwinistotallyadistinctcharacter，atleastwithregardtohiseffectupontheprosperityofthestate，fromthefrugalmanofDrAdamSmith。Thefrugalmaninordertomakemoremoneysavesfromhisincomeandaddstohiscapital，andthiscapitalheeitheremployshimselfinthemaintenanceofproductivelabour，orhelendsittosomeotherpersonwhowil1
　　probablyemployitinthisway。Hebenefitsthestatebecauseheaddstoitsgeneralcapital，andbecausewealthemployedascapitalnotonlysetsinmotionmorelabourthanwhenspentasincome，butthelabourisbesidesofamorevaluablekind。ButtheavariciousmanofMrGodwinlocksuphiswealthinachestandsetsinmotionnolabourofanykind，eitherproductiveorunproductive。ThisissoessentialadifferencethatMrGodwin’sdecisioninhisessayappearsatonceasevidentlyfalseasDrAdamSmith’spositionisevidentlytrue。Itcouldnot，indeed，butoccurtoMrGodwinthatsomepresentinconveniencemightarisetothepoorfromthuslockingupthefundsdestinedforthemaintenanceoflabour。Theonlyway，therefore，hehadofweakeningthisobjectionwastocomparethetwocharacterschieflywithregardtotheirtendencytoacceleratetheapproachofthathappystateofcultivatedequality，onwhichhesaysweoughtalwaystofixoureyesasourpolarstar。
　　Ithinkithasbeenprovedintheformerpartsofthisessaythatsuchastateofsocietyisabsolutelyimpracticable。Whatconsequencesthenarewetoexpectfromlookingtosuchapointasourguideandpolarstarinthegreatseaofpoliticaldiscovery？Reasonwouldteachustoexpectnootherthanwindsperpetuallyadverse，constantbutfruitlesstoil，frequentshipwreck，andcertainmisery。Weshallnotonlyfailinmakingthesmallestrealapproachtowardssuchaperfectformofsociety;butbywastingourstrengthofmindandbody，inadirectioninwhichitisimpossibletoproceed，andbythefrequentdistresswhichwemustnecessarilyoccasionbyourrepeatedfailures，weshallevidentlyimpedethatdegreeofimprovementinsociety，whichisreallyattainable。
　　IthasappearedthatasocietyconstitutedaccordingtoMrGodwin’ssystemmust，fromtheinevitablelawsofournature，degenerateintoaclassofproprietorsandaclassoflabourers，andthatthesubstitutionofbenevolenceforself—loveasthemovingprincipleofsociety，insteadofproducingthehappyeffectsthatmightbeexpectedfromsofairaname，wouldcausethesamepressureofwanttobefeltbythewholeofsociety，whichisnowfeltonlybyapart。Itistotheestablishedadministrationofpropertyandtotheapparentlynarrowprincipleofself—lovethatweareindebtedforallthenoblestexertionsofhumangenius，allthefinerandmoredelicateemotionsofthesoul，foreverything，indeed，thatdistinguishesthecivilizedfromthesavagestate;andnosufficientchangehasasyettakenplaceinthenatureofcivilizedmantoenableustosaythatheeitheris，oreverwillbe，inastatewhenhemaysafelythrowdowntheladderbywhichhehasrisentothiseminence。
　　Ifineverysocietythathasadvancedbeyondthesavagestate，aclassofproprietorsandaclassoflabourersmustnecessarilyexist，itisevidentthat，aslabouristheonlypropertyoftheclassoflabourers，everythingthattendstodiminishthevalueofthispropertymusttendtodiminishthepossessionofthispartofsociety。Theonlywaythatapoormanhasofsupportinghimselfinindependenceisbytheexertionofhisbodilystrength。Thisistheonlycommodityhehastogiveinexchangeforthenecessariesoflife。Itwouldhardlyappearthenthatyoubenefithimbynarrowingthemarketforthiscommodity，bydecreasingthedemandforlabour，andlesseningthevalueoftheonlypropertythathepossesses。
　　ItshouldbeobservedthattheprincipalargumentofthisEssayonlygoestoprovethenecessityofaclassofproprietors，andaclassoflabourers，butbynomeansinfersthatthepresentgreatinequalityofpropertyiseithernecessaryorusefultosociety。Onthecontrary，itmustcertainlybeconsideredasanevil，andeveryinstitutionthatpromotesitisessentiallybadandimpolitic。Butwhetheragovernmentcouldwithadvantagetosocietyactivelyinterferetorepressinequalityoffortunesmaybeamatterofdoubt。PerhapsthegeneroussystemofperfectlibertyadoptedbyDrAdamSmithandtheFrencheconomistswouldbeillexchangedforanysystemofrestraint。
　　MrGodwinwouldperhapssaythatthewholesystemofbarterandexchangeisavileandiniquitoustraffic。Ifyouwouldessentiallyrelievethepoorman，youshouldtakeapartofhislabouruponyourself，orgivehimyourmoney，withoutexactingsosevereareturnforit。Inanswertothefirstmethodproposed，itmaybeobserved，thateveniftherichcouldbepersuadedtoassistthepoorinthisway，thevalueoftheassistancewouldbecomparativelytrifling。therich，thoughtheythinkthemselvesofgreatimportance，bearbutasmallproportioninpointofnumberstothepoor，andwould，therefore，relievethembutofasmallpartoftheirburdensbytakingashare。Wereallthosethatareemployedinthelaboursofluxuriesaddedtothenumberofthoseemployedinproducingnecessaries，andcouldthesenecessarylaboursbeamicablydividedamongall，eachman’ssharemightindeedbecomparativelylight;butdesirableassuchanamicabledivisionwouldundoubtedlybe，Icannotconceiveanypracticalprincipleaccordingtowhichitcouldtakeplace。Ithasbeenshewn，thatthespiritofbenevolence，guidedbythestrictimpartialjusticethatMrGodwindescribes，would，ifvigorouslyactedupon，depressinwantandmiserythewholehumanrace。Letusexaminewhatwouldbetheconsequence，iftheproprietorweretoretainadecentshareforhimself，buttogivetherestawaytothepoor，withoutexactingataskfromtheminreturn。Nottomentiontheidlenessandthevicethatsuchaproceeding，ifgeneral，wouldprobablycreateinthepresentstateofsociety，andthegreat。risktherewouldbe，ofdiminishingtheproduceofland，aswellasthelaboursofluxury，anotherobjectionyetremains。
　　MrGodwinseemstohavebutlittlerespectforpracticalprinciples;butIownitappearstome，thatheisamuchgreaterbenefactortomankind，whopointsouthowaninferiorgoodmaybeattained，thanhewhomerelyexpatiatesonthedeformityofthepresentstateofsociety，andthebeautyofadifferentstate，withoutpointingoutapracticalmethod，thatmightbeimmediatelyapplied，ofacceleratingouradvancesfromtheone，totheother。
　　Ithasappearedthatfromtheprincipleofpopulationmorewillalwaysbeinwantthancanbeadequatelysupplied。Thesurplusoftherichmanmightbesufficientforthree，butfourwillbedesiroustoobtainit。Hecannotmakethisselection。ofthreeoutofthefourwithoutconferringagreatfavouronthosethataretheobjectsofhischoice。Thesepersonsmustconsiderthemselvesasunderagreatobligationtohimandasdependentuponhimfortheirsupport。Therichmanwouldfeelhispowerandthepoormanhisdependence，andtheevileffectsofthesetwoimpressionsonthehumanheartarewellknown。ThoughIperfectlyagreewithMrGodwinthereforeintheevilofhardlabour，yetI
　　stillthinkitalessevil，andlesscalculatedtodebasethehumanmind，thandependence，andeveryhistoryofmanthatwehaveeverreadplacesinastrong。pointofviewthedangertowhichthatmindisexposedwhichisentrustedwithconstantpower。
　　Inthepresentstateofthings，andparticularlywhenlabourisinrequest，themanwhodoesaday’sworkformeconfersfullasgreatanobligationuponmeasIdouponhim。Ipossesswhathewants，hepossesseswhatIwant。Wemakeanamicableexchange。
　　Thepoormanwalkserectinconsciousindependence;andthemindofhisemployerisnotvitiatedbyasenseofpower。
　　ThreeorfourhundredyearsagotherewasundoubtedlymuchlesslabourinEngland，inproportiontothepopulation，thanatpresent，buttherewasmuchmoredependence，andweprobablyshouldnotnowenjoyourpresentdegreeofcivillibertyifthepoor，bytheintroductionofmanufactures，hadnotbeenenabledtogivesomethinginexchangefortheprovisionsofthegreatLords，insteadofbeingdependentupontheirbounty。Eventhegreatestenemiesoftradeandmanufactures，andIdonotreckonmyselfaverydeterminedfriendtothem，mustallowthatwhentheywereintroducedintoEngland，libertycameintheirtrain。
　　Nothingthathasbeensaidtendsinthemostremotedegreetoundervaluetheprincipleofbenevolence。Itisoneofthenoblestandmostgodlikequalitiesofthehumanheart，generated，perhaps，slowlyandgraduallyfromself—love，andafterwardsintendedtoactasagenerallaw，whosekindofficeitshouldbe，tosoftenthepartialdeformities，tocorrecttheasperities，andtosmooththewrinklesofitsparent：andthisseemstobetheanalogofallnature。Perhapsthereisnoonegenerallawofnaturethatwillnotappear，tousatleast，toproducepartialevil;andwefrequentlyobserveatthesametime，somebountifulprovisionwhich，actingasanothergenerallaw，correctstheinequalitiesofthefirst。
　　Theproperofficeofbenevolenceistosoftenthepartialevils。arisingfromself—love，butitcanneverbesubstitutedinitsplace。Ifnomanweretoallowhimselftoacttillhehadcompletelydeterminedthattheactionhewasabouttoperformwasmoreconducivethananyothertothegeneralgood，themostenlightenedmindswouldhesitateinperplexityandamazement;andtheunenlightenedwouldbecontinuallycommittingthegrossestmistakes。
　　AsMrGodwin，therefore，hasnotlaiddownanypracticalprincipleaccordingtowhichthenecessarylaboursofagriculturemightbeamicablysharedamongthewholeclassoflabourers，bygeneralinvectivesagainstemployingthepoorheappearstopursueanunattainablegoodthroughmuchpresentevil。Forifeverymanwhoemploysthepooroughttobeconsideredastheirenemy，andasaddingtotheweightoftheiroppressions，andifthemiserisforthisreasontobepreferredtothemanwhospendshisincome，itfollowsthatanynumberofmenwhonowspendtheirincomesmight，totheadvantageofsociety，beconvertedintomisers。Supposethenthatahundredthousandpersonswhonowemploytenmeneachweretolockuptheirwealthfromgeneraluse，itisevident，thatamillionofworkingmenofdifferentkindswouldbecompletelythrownoutofallemployment。
　　TheextensivemiserythatsuchaneventwouldproduceinthepresentstateofsocietyMrGodwinhimselfcouldhardlyrefusetoacknowledge，andIquestionwhetherhemightnotfindsomedifficultyinprovingthataconductofthiskindtendedmorethantheconductofthosewhospendtheirincomesto’placehumanbeingsintheconditioninwhichtheyoughttobeplaced。’ButMrGodwinsaysthatthemiserreallylocksupnothing，thatthepointhasnotbeenrightlyunderstood，andthatthetruedevelopmentanddefinitionofthenatureofwealthhavenotbeenappliedtoillustrateit。Havingdefinedthereforewealth，veryjustly，tobethecommoditiesraisedandfosteredbyhumanlabour，heobservesthatthemiserlocksupneithercorn，noroxen，norclothes，norhouses。Undoubtedlyhedoesnotreallylockupthesearticles，buthelocksupthepowerofproducingthem，whichisvirtuallythesame。Thesethingsarecertainlyusedandconsumedbyhiscontemporaries，astruly，andtoasgreatanextent，asifhewereabeggar;butnottoasgreatanextentasifhehademployedhiswealthinturningupmoreland，inbreedingmoreoxen，inemployingmoretailors，andinbuildingmorehouses。Butsupposing，foramoment，thattheconductofthemiserdidnottendtocheckanyreallyusefulproduce，howareallthosewhoarethrownoutofemploymenttoobtainpatentswhichtheymayshewinordertobeawardedapropershareofthefoodandraimentproducedbythesociety？Thisistheunconquerabledifficulty。
　　IamperfectlywillingtoconcedetoMrGodwinthatthereismuchmorelabourintheworldthanisreallynecessary，andthat，ifthelowerclassesofsocietycouldagreeamongthemselvesnevertoworkmorethansixorsevenhoursintheday，thecommoditiesessentialtohumanhappinessmightstillbeproducedinasgreatabundanceasatpresent。Butitisalmostimpossibletoconceivethatsuchanagreementcouldbeadheredto。Fromtheprincipleofpopulation，somewouldnecessarilybemoreinwantthanothers。Thosethathadlargefamilieswouldnaturallybedesirousofexchangingtwohoursmoreoftheirlabourforanamplerquantityofsubsistence。Howaretheytobepreventedfrommakingthisexchange？itwouldbeaviolationofthefirstandmostsacredpropertythatamanpossessestoattempt，bypositiveinstitutions，tointerferewithhiscommandoverhisownlabour。
　　TillMrGodwin，therefore，canpointoutsomepracticalplanaccordingtowhichthenecessarylabourinasocietymightbeequitablydivided，hisinvectivesagainstlabour，iftheywereattendedto，wouldcertainlyproducemuchpresentevilwithoutapproximatingustothatstateofcultivatedequalitytowhichhelooksforwardashispolarstar，andwhich，heseemstothink，shouldatpresentbeourguideindeterminingthenatureandtendencyofhumanactions。Amarinerguidedbysuchapolarstarisindangerofshipwreck。
　　Perhapsthereisnopossiblewayinwhichwealthcouldingeneralbeemployedsobeneficiallytoastate，andparticularlytothelowerordersofit，asbyimprovingandrenderingproductivethatlandwhichtoafarmerwouldnotanswertheexpenseofcultivation。HadMrGodwinexertedhisenergeticeloquenceinpaintingthesuperiorworthandusefulnessofthecharacterwhoemployedthepoorinthisway，tohimwhoemployedtheminnarrowluxuries，everyenlightenedmanmusthaveapplaudedhisefforts。Theincreasingdemandforagriculturallabourmustalwaystendtobettertheconditionofthepoor;andiftheaccessionofworkbeofthiskind，sofarisitfrombeingtruethatthepoorwouldbeobligedtoworktenhoursforthesamepricethattheybeforeworkedeight，thattheveryreversewouldbethefact;andalabourermightthensupporthiswifeandfamilyaswellbythelabourofsixhoursashecouldbeforebythelabourofeight。
　　Thelabourcreatedbyluxuries，thoughusefulindistributingtheproduceofthecountry，withoutvitiatingtheproprietorbypower，ordebasingthelabourerbydependence，hasnot，indeed，thesamebeneficialeffectsonthestateofthepoor。Agreataccessionofworkfrommanufacturers，thoughitmayraisethepriceoflabourevenmorethananincreasingdemandforagriculturallabour，yet，asinthiscasethequantityoffoodinthecountrymaynotbeproportionablyincreasing，theadvantagetothepoorwillbebuttemporary，asthepriceofprovisionsmustnecessarilyriseinproportiontothepriceoflabour。
　　Relativetothissubject，IcannotavoidventuringafewremarksonapartofDrAdamSmith’sWealthofNations，speakingatthesametimewiththatdiffidencewhichIoughtcertainlytofeelindifferingfromapersonsojustlycelebratedinthepoliticalworld。
　　CHAPTER16
　　ProbableerrorofDrAdamSmithinrepresentingeveryincreaseoftherevenueorstockofasocietyasanincreaseinthefundsforthemaintenanceoflabour—Instanceswhereanincreaseofwealthcanhavenotendencytobettertheconditionofthelabouringpoor—Englandhasincreasedinricheswithoutaproportionalincreaseinthefundsforthemaintenanceoflabour—ThestateofthepoorinChinawouldnotbeimprovedbyanincreaseofwealthfrommanufactures。
　　THEprofessedobjectofDrAdamSmith’sinquiryisthenatureandcausesofthewealthofnations。Thereisanotherinquiry，however，perhapsstillmoreinteresting，whichheoccasionallymixeswithit，Imeananinquiryintothecauseswhichaffectthehappinessofnationsorthehappinessandcomfortofthelowerordersofsociety，whichisthemostnumerousclassineverynation。Iamsufficiencyawareofthenearconnectionofthesetwosubjects，andthatthecauseswhichtendtoincreasethewealthofastatetendalso，generallyspeaking，toincreasethehappinessofthelowerclassesofthepeople。ButperhapsDrAdamSmithhasconsideredthesetwoinquiriesasstillmorenearlyconnectedthantheyreallyare;atleast，hehasnotstoppedtotakenoticeofthoseinstanceswherethewealthofasocietymayincrease（accordingtohisdefinitionof’wealth’）withouthavinganytendencytoincreasethecomfortsofthelabouringpartofit。Idonotmeantoenterintoaphilosophicaldiscussionofwhatconstitutestheproperhappinessofman，butshallmerelyconsidertwouniversallyacknowledgedingredients，health，andthecommandofthenecessariesandconveniencesoflife。
　　Littleornodoubtcanexistthatthecomfortsofthelabouringpoordependupontheincreaseofthefundsdestinedforthemaintenanceoflabour，andwillbeveryexactlyinproportiontotherapidityofthisincrease。Thedemandforlabourwhichsuchincreasewouldoccasion，bycreatingacompetitioninthemarket，mustnecessarilyraisethevalueoflabour，and，tilltheadditionalnumberofhandsrequiredwerereared，theincreasedfundswouldbedistributedtothesamenumberofpersonsasbeforetheincrease，andthereforeeverylabourerwouldlivecomparativelyathisease。ButperhapsDrAdamSmitherrsinrepresentingeveryincreaseoftherevenueorstockofasocietyasanincreaseofthesefunds。Suchsurplusstockorrevenuewill，indeed，alwaysbeconsideredbytheindividualpossessingitasanadditionalfundfromwhichhemaymaintainmorelabour：
　　butitwillnotbearealandeffectualfundforthemaintenanceofanadditionalnumberoflabourers，unlessthewhole，oratleastagreatpartofthisincreaseofthestockorrevenueofthesociety，beconvertibleintoaproportionalquantityofprovisions;anditwillnotbesoconvertiblewheretheincreasehasarisenmerelyfromtheproduceoflabour，andnotfromtheproduceofland。Adistinctionwillinthiscaseoccur，betweenthenumberofhandswhichthestockofthesocietycouldemploy，andthenumberwhichitsterritorycanmaintain。
　　Toexplainmyselfbyaninstance。DrAdamSmithdefinesthewealthofanationtoconsist。Intheannualproduceofitslandandlabour。Thisdefinitionevidentlyincludesmanufacturedproduce，aswellastheproduceoftheland。Nowsupposinganationforacourseofyearswastoaddwhatitsavedfromitsyearlyrevenuetoitsmanufacturingcapitalsolely，andnottoitscapitalemployeduponland，itisevidentthatitmightgrowricheraccordingtotheabovedefinition，withoutapowerofsupportingagreaternumberoflabourers，and，therefore，withoutanincreaseintherealfundsforthe。maintenanceoflabour。
　　Therewould，notwithstanding，beademandforlabourfromthepowerwhicheachmanufacturerwouldpossess，oratleastthinkhepossessed，ofextendinghisoldstockintradeorofsettingupfreshworks。Thisdemandwouldofcourseraisethepriceoflabour，butiftheyearlystockofprovisionsinthecountrywasnotincreasing，thisrisewouldsoonturnouttobemerelynominal，asthepriceofprovisionsmustnecessarilyrisewithit。Thedemandformanufacturinglabourersmight，indeed，enticemanyfromagricultureandthustendtodiminishtheannualproduceoftheland，butwewillsupposeanyeffectofthiskindtobecompensatedbyimprovementsintheinstrumentsofagriculture，andthequantityofprovisionsthereforetoremainthesame。Improvementsinmanufacturingmachinerywouldofcoursetakeplace，andthiscircumstance，addedtothegreaternumberofhandsemployedinmanufactures，wouldcausetheannualproduceofthelabourofthecountrytobeuponthewholegreatlyincreased。
　　Thewealththereforeofthecountrywouldbeincreasingannually，accordingtothedefinition，andmightnot，perhaps，beincreasingveryslowly。
　　Thequestioniswhetherwealth，increasinginthisway，hasanytendencytobettertheconditionofthelabouringpoor。Itisaself—evidentpropositionthatanygeneralriseinthepriceoflabour，thestockofprovisionsremainingthesame，canonlybeanominalrise，asitmustveryshortlybefollowedbyaproportionalriseinthepriceofprovisions。Theincreaseinthepriceoflabour，therefore，whichwehavesupposed，wouldhavelittleornoeffectingivingthelabouringpooragreatercommandoverthenecessariesandconveniencesoflife。Inthisrespecttheywouldbenearlyinthesamestateasbefore。Inoneotherrespecttheywouldbeinaworsestate。Agreaterproportionofthemwouldbeemployedinmanufactures，andfewer，consequently，inagriculture。Andthisexchangeofprofessionswillbeallowed，Ithink，byall，tobeveryunfavourableinrespectofhealth，oneessentialingredientofhappiness，besidesthegreateruncertaintyofmanufacturinglabour，arisingfromthecapricioustasteofman，theaccidentsofwar，andothercauses。
　　Itmaybesaid，perhaps，thatsuchaninstanceasIhavesupposedcouldnotoccur，becausetheriseinthepriceofprovisionswouldimmediatelyturnsomeadditionalcapitalintothechannelofagriculture。Butthisisaneventwhichmaytakeplaceveryslowly，asitshouldberemarkedthatariseinthepriceoflabourhadprecededtheriseofprovisions，andwould，therefore，impedethegoodeffectsuponagriculture，whichtheincreasedvalueoftheproduceofthelandmightotherwisehaveoccasioned。
　　Itmightalsobesaid，thattheadditionalcapitalofthenationwouldenableittoimportprovisionssufficientforthemaintenanceofthosewhomitsstockcouldemploy。Asmallcountrywithalargenavy，andgreatinlandaccommodationsforcarriage，suchasHolland，may，indeed，importanddistributeaneffectualquantityofprovisions;butthepriceofprovisionsmustbeveryhightomakesuchanimportationanddistributionanswerinlargecountrieslessadvantageouslycircumstancedinthisrespect。
　　Aninstance，accuratelysuchasIhavesupposed，maynot，perhaps，everhaveoccurred，butIhavelittledoubtthatinstancesnearlyapproximatingtoitmaybefoundwithoutanyverylaborioussearch。IndeedIamstronglyinclinedtothinkthatEnglandherself，sincetheRevolution，affordsaverystrikingelucidationoftheargumentinquestion。
　　Thecommerceofthiscountry，internalaswellasexternal，hascertainlybeenrapidlyadvancingduringthelastcentury。TheexchangeablevalueinthemarketofEuropeoftheannualproduceofitslandandlabourhas，withoutdoubt，increasedveryconsiderably。But，uponexamination，itwillbefoundthattheincreasehasbeenchieflyintheproduceoflabourandnotintheproduceofland，andtherefore，thoughthewealthofthenationhasbeenadvancingwithaquickpace，theeffectualfundsforthemaintenanceoflabourhavebeenincreasingveryslowly，andtheresultissuchasmightbeexpected。Theincreasingwealthofthenationhashadlittleornotendencytobettertheconditionofthelabouringpoor。Theyhavenot，Ibelieve，agreatercommandofthenecessariesandconveniencesoflife，andamuchgreaterproportionofthemthanattheperiodoftheRevolutionisemployedinmanufacturesandcrowdedtogetherincloseandunwholesomerooms。
　　CouldwebelievethestatementofDrPricethatthepopulationofEnglandhasdecreasedsincetheRevolution，itwouldevenappearthattheeffectualfundsforthemaintenanceoflabourhadbeendecliningduringtheprogressofwealthinotherrespects。ForIconceivethatitmaybelaiddownasageneralrulethatiftheeffectualfundsforthemaintenanceoflabourareincreasing，thatis，iftheterritorycanmaintainaswellasthestockemployagreaternumberoflabourers，thisadditionalnumberwillquicklyspringup，eveninspiteofsuchwarsasDrPriceenumerates。And，consequently，ifthepopulationofanycountryhasbeenstationary，ordeclining，wemaysafelyinfer，that，howeveritmayhaveadvancedinmanufacturingwealth，itseffectualfundsforthemaintenanceoflabourcannothaveincreased。
　　Itisdifficult，however，toconceivethatthepopulationofEnglandhasbeendecliningsincetheRevolution，thougheverytestimonyconcurstoprovethatitsincrease，ifithasincreased，hasbeenveryslow。Inthecontroversywhichthequestionhasoccasioned，DrPriceundoubtedlyappearstobemuchmorecompletelymasterofhissubject，andtopossessmoreaccurateinformation，thanhisopponents。Judgingsimplyfromthiscontroversy，IthinkoneshouldsaythatDrPrice’spointisnearerbeingprovedthanMrHowlett’s。Truth，probably，liesbetweenthetwostatements，butthissuppositionmakestheincreaseofpopulationsincetheRevolutiontohavebeenveryslowincomparisonwiththeincreaseofwealth。
　　Thattheproduceofthelandhasbeendecreasing，oreventhatithasbeenabsolutelystationaryduringthelastcentury，fewwillbedisposedtobelieve。Theenclosureofcommonsandwastelandscertainlytendstoincreasethefoodofthecountry，butithasbeenassertedwithconfidencethattheenclosureofcommonfieldshasfrequentlyhadacontraryeffect，andthatlargetractsoflandwhichformerlyproducedgreatquantitiesofcorn，bybeingconvertedintopasturebothemployfewerhandsandfeedfewermouthsthanbeforetheirenclosure。Itis，indeed，anacknowledgedtruth，thatpasturelandproducesasmallerquantityofhumansubsistencethancornlandofthesamenaturalfertility，andcoulditbeclearlyascertainedthatfromtheincreaseddemandforbutchers’meatofthebestquality，anditsincreasedpriceinconsequence，agreaterquantityofgoodlandhasannuallybeenemployedingrazing，thediminutionofhumansubsistence，whichthiscircumstancewouldoccasion，mighthavecounterbalancedtheadvantagesderivedfromtheenclosureofwastelands，andthegeneralimprovementsinhusbandry。
　　Itscarcelyneedberemarkedthatthehighpriceofbutchers’
　　meatatpresent，anditslowpriceformerly，werenotcausedbythescarcityintheonecaseortheplentyintheother，butbythedifferentexpensesustainedatthedifferentperiods，inpreparingcattleforthemarket。Itis，however，possible，thattheremighthavebeenmorecattleahundredyearsagointhecountrythanatpresent;butnodoubtcanbeentertained，thatthereismuchmoremeatofasuperiorqualitybroughttomarketatpresentthanevertherewas。Whenthepriceofbutchers’meatwasverylow，cattlewererearedchieflyuponwastelands;andexceptforsomeoftheprincipalmarkets，wereprobablykilledwithbutlittleotherfatting。Thevealthatissoldsocheapinsomedistantcountiesatpresentbearslittleotherresemblancethanthename，tothatwhichisboughtinLondon。Formerly，thepriceofbutchers，meatwouldnotpayforrearing，andscarcelyforfeeding，cattleonlandthatwouldanswerintillage;butthepresentpricewillnotonlypayforfattingcattleontheverybestland，butwillevenallowoftherearingmany，onlandthatwouldbeargoodcropsofcorn。Thesamenumberofcattle，oreventhesameweightofcattleatthedifferentperiodswhenkilled，willhaveconsumed（ifImaybeallowedtheexpression）verydifferentquantitiesofhumansubstance。Afattedbeastmayinsomerespectsbeconsidered，inthelanguageoftheFrencheconomists，36asanunproductivelabourer：hehasaddednothingtothevalueoftherawproducethathehasconsumed。Thepresentsystemofgrating，undoubtedlytendsmorethantheformersystemtodiminishthequantityofhumansubsistenceinthecountry，inproportiontothegeneralfertilityoftheland。
　　Iwouldnotbyanymeansbeunderstoodtosaythattheformersystemeithercouldoroughttohavecontinued。Theincreasingpriceofbutchers’meatisanaturalandinevitableconsequenceofthegeneralprogressofcultivation;butIcannothelpthinking，thatthepresentgreatdemandforbutchers’meatofthebestquality，andthequantityofgoodlandthatisinconsequenceannuallyemployedtoproduceit，togetherwiththegreatnumberofhorsesatpresentkeptforpleasure，arethechiefcausesthathavepreventedthequantityofhumanfoodinthecountryfromkeepingpacewiththegenerallyincreasedfertilityofthesoil;andachangeofcustomintheserespectswould，Ihavelittledoubt，haveaverysensibleeffectonthequantityofsubsistenceinthecountry，andconsequentlyonitspopulation。
　　Theemploymentofmuchofthemostfertilelandingrating，theimprovementsinagriculturalinstruments，theincreaseoflargefarms，andparticularlythediminutionofthenumberofcottagesthroughoutthekingdom，allconcurtoprove，thattherearenotprobablysomanypersonsemployedinagriculturallabournowasattheperiodoftheRevolution。Whateverincreaseofpopulation，therefore，hastakenplace，mustbeemployedalmostwhollyinmanufactures，anditiswellknownthatthefailureofsomeofthesemanufactures，merelyfromthecapriceoffashion，suchastheadoptionofmuslinsinsteadofsilks，orofshoe—stringsandcoveredbuttons，insteadofbucklesandmetalbuttons，combinedwiththerestraintsinthemarketoflabourarisingfromcorporationandparishlaws，havefrequentlydriventhousandsoncharityforsupport。Thegreatincreaseofthepoorratesis，indeed，ofitselfastrongevidencethatthepoorhavenotagreatercommandofthenecessariesandconveniencesoflife，andiftotheconsideration，thattheirconditioninthisrespectisratherworsethanbetter，beaddedthecircumstance，thatamuchgreaterproportionofthemisemployedinlargemanufactories，unfavourablebothtohealthandvirtue，itmustbeacknowledged，thattheincreaseofwealthoflateyearshashadnotendencytoincreasethehappinessofthelabouringpoor。
　　Thateveryincreaseofthestockorrevenueofanationcannotbeconsideredasanincreaseoftherealfundsforthemaintenanceoflabourand，therefore，cannothavethesamegoodeffectupontheconditionofthepoor，willappearinastronglightiftheargumentbeappliedtoChina。
　　DrAdamSmithobservesthatChinahasprobablylongbeenasrichasthenatureofherlawsandinstitutionswilladmit，butthatwithotherlawsandinstitutions，andifforeigncommercewerehadinhonour，shemightstillbemuchricher。Thequestionis，wouldsuchanincreaseofwealthbeanincreaseoftherealfundsforthemaintenanceoflabour，andconsequentlytendtoplacethelowerclassesofpeopleinChinainastateofgreaterplenty？
　　Itisevident，thatiftradeandforeigncommercewereheldingreathonourinChina，fromtheplentyoflabourers，andthecheapnessoflabour，shemightworkupmanufacturesforforeignsaletoanimmenseamount。Itisequallyevidentthatfromthegreatbulkofprovisionsandtheamazingextentofherinlandterritoryshecouldnotinreturnimportsuchaquantityaswouldbeanysensibleadditiontotheannualstockofsubsistenceinthecountry。Herimmenseamountofmanufactures，therefore，shewouldexchange，chiefly，forluxuriescollectedfromallpartsoftheworld。Atpresent，itappears，thatnolabourwhateverissparedintheprOductionoffood。Thecountryisratherover—peopleinproportiontowhatitsstockcanemploy，andlabouris，therefore，soabundant，thatnopainsaretakentoabridgeit。Theconsequenceofthisis，probably，thegreatestproductionoffoodthatthesoilcanpossiblyafford，foritwillbegenerallyobserved，thatprocessesforabridginglabour，thoughtheymayenableafarmertobringacertainquantityofgraincheapertomarket，tendrathertodiminishthanincreasethewholeproduce;andinagriculture，therefore，may，insomerespects，beconsideredratherasprivatethanpublicadvantages。
　　AnimmensecapitalcouldnotbeemployedinChinainpreparingmanufacturesforforeigntradewithouttakingoffsomanylabourersfromagricultureastoalterthisstateofthings，andinsomedegreetodiminishtheproduceofthecountry。Thedemandformanufacturinglabourerswouldnaturallyraisethepriceoflabour，butasthequantityofsubsistencewouldnotbeincreased，thepriceofprovisionswouldkeeppacewithit，orevenmorethankeeppacewithitifthequantityofprovisionswerereallydecreasing。Thecountrywouldbeevidentlyadvancinginwealth，theexchangeablevalueoftheannualproduceofitslandandlabourwouldbeannuallyaugmented，yettherealfundsforthemaintenanceoflabourwouldbestationary，orevendeclining，and，consequently，theincreasingwealthofthenationwouldrathertendtodepressthantoraisetheconditionofthepoor。Withregardtothecommandoverthenecessariesandcomfortsoflife，theywouldbeinthesameorratherworsestatethanbefore;andagreatpartofthemwouldhaveexchangedthehealthylaboursofagriculturefortheunhealthyoccupationsofmanufacturingindustry。
　　Theargument，perhaps，appearsclearerwhenappliedtoChina，becauseitisgenerallyallowedthatthewealthofChinahasbeenlongstationary。Withregardtoanyothercountryitmightbealwaysamatterofdisputeatwhichofthetwoperiods，compared，wealthwasincreasingthefastest，asitisupontherapidityoftheincreaseofwealthatanyparticularperiodthatDrAdamSmithsaystheconditionofthepoordepends。Itisevident，however，thattwonationsmightincreaseexactlywiththesamerapidityintheexchangeablevalueoftheannualproduceoftheirlandandlabour，yetifonehadapplieditselfchieflytoagriculture，andtheotherchieflytocommerce，thefundsforthemaintenanceoflabour，andconsequentlytheeffectoftheincreaseofwealthineachnation，wouldbeextremelydifferent。
　　Inthatwhichhadapplieditselfchieflytoagriculture，thepoorwouldliveingreatplenty，andpopulationwouldrapidlyincrease。Inthatwhichhadapplieditselfchieflytocommerce，thepoorwouldbecomparativelybutlittlebenefitedandconsequentlypopulationwouldincreaseslowly。
　　CHAPTER17
　　Questionoftheproperdefinitionofthewealthofastate—
　　ReasongivenbytheFrencheconomistsforconsideringallmanufacturersasunproductivelabourers，notthetruereason—
　　Thelabourofartificersandmanufacturerssufficientlyproductivetoindividuals，thoughnottothestate—AremarkablepassageinDrPrice’stwovolumesofObservations—ErrorofDrPriceinattributingthehappinessandrapidpopulationofAmerica，chiefly，toitspeculiarstateofcivilization—Noadvantagecanbeexpectedfromshuttingoureyestothedifficultiesinthewaytotheimprovementofsociety。
　　AQUESTIONseemsnaturallytoariseherewhethertheexchangeablevalueoftheannualproduceofthelandandlabourbetheproperdefinitionofthewealthofacountry，orwhetherthegrossproduceoftheland，accordingtotheFrencheconomists，maynotbeamoreaccuratedefinition。Certainitisthateveryincreaseofwealth，accordingtothedefinitionoftheeconomists，willbeanincreaseofthefundsforthemaintenanceoflabour，andconsequentlywillalwaystendtoamelioratetheconditionofthelabouringpoor，thoughanincreaseofwealth，accordingtoDrAdamSmith’sdefinition，willbynomeansinvariablyhavethesametendency。AndyetitmaynotfollowfromthisconsiderationthatDrAdamSmith’sdefinitionisnotjust。Itseemsinmanyrespectsimpropertoexcludetheclothingandlodgingofawholepeoplefromanypartoftheirrevenue。Muchofitmay，indeed，beofverytrivialandunimportantvalueincomparisonwiththefoodofthecountry，yetstillitmaybefairlyconsideredasapartofitsrevenue;and，therefore，theonlypointinwhichIshoulddifferfromDrAdamSmithiswhereheseemstoconsidereveryincreaseoftherevenueorstockofasocietyasanincreaseofthefundsforthemaintenanceoflabour，andconsequentlyastendingalwaystoamelioratetheconditionofthepoor。
　　Thefinesilksandcottons，thelaces，andotherornamentalluxuriesofarichcountry，maycontributeveryconsiderablytoaugmenttheexchangeablevalueofitsannualproduce;yettheycontributebutinaverysmalldegreetoaugmentthemassofhappinessinthesociety，anditappearstomethatitiswithsomeviewtotherealutilityoftheproducethatweoughttoestimatetheproductivenessorunproductivenessofdifferentsortsoflabour。TheFrencheconomistsconsideralllabouremployedinmanufacturesasunproductive。Comparingitwiththelabouremployeduponland，Ishouldbeperfectlydisposedtoagreewiththem，butnotexactlyforthereasonswhichtheygive。
　　Theysaythatlabouremployeduponlandisproductivebecausetheproduce，overandabovecompletelypayingthelabourerandthefarmer，affordsaclearrenttothelandlord，andthatthelabouremployeduponapieceoflaceisunproductivebecauseitmerelyreplacestheprovisionsthattheworkmanhadconsumed，andthestockofhisemployer，withoutaffordinganyclearrentwhatever。