XIV., ch. 30, excuses for instance the extravagant (?)
buildings at Versailles; and in a very similar way Catharine
II. expressed herself in speaking to the Prince de Ligne:
Mémoires et Mélanges par le Prince de Ligne, 1827, II, 358.
_v. Schröder_ even thinks that the Prince might consume as
much and even more than "the entire capital" of the country
amounted to; only, he would have him "let it get quickly
among the people again." He is also in favor of the utmost
splendor in dress, provided the public see to it that
nothing was worn in the country which was not made in the
country. (Fürstl. Schatz- u. Rentkammer, 47, 172.) Similarly
even _Botero_, Della Ragion di Stato VII, 85; VIII, 191; and
recently _v. Struensee_, Abhandlungen I, 190. The principle
of Polycrates in _Herodotus_ is nearly to the same effect.
Compare, per contra, _Ferguson_, Hist. of Civil Society, V,
5.]
[Footnote 210-4: With the exception of the profit made by
the manufacturers.]
[Footnote 210-5: Strikingly ignored by _Sismondi_, N. P.,
IV, ch. II.]
[Footnote 210-6: _Bastiat_, Sophismes économiques, 1847, ch.
IV. Everything which, in the long run, either promotes or
injures production, "steps over the producer and turns in
the end to the gain or loss of the consumer." Only for this
principle, inequality and dissensions among men would keep
growing perpetually. All that the systems of Saint Simonism
and communism contain that is relatively true is thus
realized.]
SECTION CCXI.
NATURE AND KINDS OF CONSUMPTION.--PRODUCTIVE CONSUMPTION.
There is no production possible without consumption. The embodiment of a
special utility into any substance is a limitation of its general
utility. Thus, for instance, when corn is baked into bread, it can no
longer be used for the manufacture of brandy or of starch.[211-1]
When, therefore, consumption is a condition (outlay) to production it is
called productive (reproductive).[211-2] Here, indeed, the form of the
consumed goods is destroyed, but the value of the goods lives on in the
new product.
There are different degrees of productiveness in consumption also. Thus,
to a scholar, his outlay for books in his own branch is immediately
productive; but nevertheless, books in departments of literature very
remote from his own, pleasure trips, etc. may serve as nutrition and as
a stimulus to his mind. According to § 52, we are compelled to consider
all consumption productive which constitutes a necessary means towards
the satisfaction of a real economic want. We may, indeed, distinguish
between productive consumption in aid of material goods, of personal
goods and useful relations; but in estimating the productiveness of
these different sorts of consumption we are concerned not so much with
the nature of the consumption as the results in relation to the nation's
wants. The powder that explodes when a powder magazine burns is consumed
unproductively; but the powder shot away in war may be productively
consumed just as that used to explode a mine may be unproductively
consumed; for instance, when the war is a just and victorious one and
the mining enterprise has failed.[211-3]
The maintenance or support of those workmen whom they themselves
acknowledge to be productive is presumably accounted productive
consumption by all political economists. Why not, therefore, the cost of
supporting and educating our children, who, it is to be hoped, will grow
up later to be productive workmen. Man's labor-power is, doubtless, one
of the greatest of all economic goods. But without the means of
subsistence, it would die out in a few days. Hence we may, and even
without an atomistic enumeration of the individual services and products
of labor, consider the continued duration of that labor-power itself as
the continued duration of the value of the consumed means of
subsistence.[211-4]
[Footnote 211-1: Even when air-dried bricks are made from
water and clay which cost nothing; when purely occupatory
work is done, and purely intellectual labor performed, some
consumption of the means of subsistence by the workmen is
always necessary.]
[Footnote 211-2: Chrêmatistikai in contradistinction to
analôtikai, according to _Plato_, De Rep., VIII, 559.
Temporary consumption. (_Umpfenbach._)]
[Footnote 211-3: _Storch_, Handbuch, II, 450.]
[Footnote 211-4: Against the difference formerly usually
assumed between productive and unproductive consumption, see
_Jacob_, Grundsätze der Nat. Oek., II, 530. It is because of
a too narrow view that _Hermann_ (II, Aufl., 311), instead
of reproductive consumption, speaks of technic consumption.]
SECTION CCXII.
UNPRODUCTIVE CONSUMPTION.
Moreover, unproductive consumption embraces not only every economic
loss, every outlay for injurious purposes,[212-1] but also every
superfluous outlay for useful purposes.[212-2] Yet, not to err in our
classification here, it is necessary to possess the impartiality and
many-sidedness of the historian, which enable one to put himself in the
place of others and feel after them as they felt. The man, for instance,
who, in cities like Regensburg and especially Rome, sees numberless
churches often, so to speak, elbowing one another, cannot fail to
recognize the difference between the buildings of to-day for business,
political, educational and recreative purposes, and the medieval, for
the satisfaction of spiritual wants. The latter also may, in their own
sphere, and in their own time, have, as a rule, operated productively,
as the former operate, often enough, by way of exception unproductively;
as in the case of railway and canal speculations which have ended in
failure. It would be difficult to decide between the relative value of
the two kinds of wants, because the parties to the controversy do not,
for the most part, share the want (_Bedürfniss_) of their respective
opponents, frequently do not even understand it, and therefore despise
it. Thus, there are semi-barbarous nations, who can entertain that
respect for the laws which is necessary even from an economic point of
view only to the extent that they see the person whose duty it is to
cause them to be observed seated on a throne and surrounded by
impressive splendor. Hence, such splendor here could not be considered
merely unproductive consumption.[212-3]
We must, moreover, remark in this place as we did above, § 54, that it
is easiest to pass the boundary line between productive and unproductive
consumption in personal services. In 1830, the expenses of the state, in
Spain, amounted to 897,000,000 of reals per annum; the outlay of
municipal corporations, to 410,000,000, and that for external purposes
of religion, 1,680,000,000. (_Borrego._) This is certainly no salutary
proportion; but it is scarcely evidence of a worse economic condition
than the fact that in Prussia it would require a basin one Prussian mile
in length, thirty-three and eight-tenths feet broad, and ten feet deep
to hold all the brandy drunk in the country (_Dieterici_); or this
other, that the British people spend yearly £68,000,000 sterling for
taxes and £100,000,000 yearly for spirituous liquors.[212-4] Berkeley
rightly says that the course practiced in Ireland, with its famishing
proletarian population, of exporting the means of subsistence and
exchanging them against delicate wines, etc., is as if a mother should
sell her children's bread to buy dainties and finery for herself with
the proceeds.[212-5] [212-6]
[Footnote 212-1: Thus, for instance, food which spoils
unused, and food which is stolen and which puts a thief in a
condition to preserve his strength to steal still more.]
[Footnote 212-2: So far _Senior_, Outlines, 66, is right:
the richer a nation or a man becomes, the greater does the
national or personal productive consumption become.]
[Footnote 212-3: Such gigantic constructions as the palaces,
pyramids, etc. of Egypt, Mexico or Peru are a certain sign
of the oppression of the people by rulers, priests or
nobles. One of the Egyptian pyramids is said to have
occupied 360,000 men for twenty years. (_Diodor._, I, 63;
_Herodot._, II, 175; _Prescott_, History of Mexico, I, 153,
History of Peru, I, 18.)]
[Footnote 212-4: Edinburg Rev., Apr., 1873, 399.]
[Footnote 212-5: _Berkeley_, Querist, 168, 175, says that
the national wants should be the guiding rule of commerce,
and that besides, the most pressing wants of the majority
should be first considered.]
[Footnote 212-6: _Ricardo_, Principles, p. 475, was of
opinion that an outlay of the national or of private income
in the payment of personal services increased the demand for
labor and the wages of labor in a higher degree than an
equal outlay for material things. The error at the
foundation of this is well refuted by _Senior_, Outlines,
160 ff.
The first to zealously advocate and treat the theory of
productive consumption was _J. B. Say_, Traité, III, ch. 2,
seq.; Cours pratique, II, 265. But the germs of the doctrine
are to be found in _Dutot_, Réflexions politiques sur le
Commerce et les Finances, 1738, 974, _éd_. Daire. His
distinctions are in part drawn with great accuracy. Thus he
says that, among others, a manufacturer of cloth,
productively consumes the results of his workmen, but that
the workmen themselves who exchange these results for bread,
consume the latter unproductively. _Say_ is guilty of the
inconsistency of claiming that only that consumption is
productive which contributes directly to the creation of
material exchangeable goods, spite of the fact that he gave
the productiveness of labor a much wider scope. _Rau_,
Lehrbuch, I, § 102 ff., 323 seq., is more consistent in so
far as he applies the same limitation in both cases.
(Compare also § 333, 336.) _Hermann_, Staatsw.
Untersuchungen, 170 seq., 231 ff., would prefer to see the
idea of productive consumption banished from the science,
for the reason that if the value of the thing alleged to be
consumed continues, there can be no such thing as its
consumption. But, I would rejoin: in a good national
economy, there would be, according to this, scarcely any
consumption whatever, because the aggregate value of that
which I have called above productive consumption is
unquestionably preserved, and continues in the aggregate
value of the national products.
Productive consumption is ultimately a stage of production,
just as production itself is ultimately a means to an end,
consumption, and therefore a preparation for the latter.
Both ideas may be rigorously kept apart from each other,
just as the expenses and receipts of a private business man,
who makes a great portion of his outlay simply with the
intention of reaping receipts therefrom, may be. Every one
desires his production to be as large as possible, and his
productive consumption, so far it does not fail of its
object, as small as possible. _Riedel_ rightly says that the
theory of reproductive consumption serves Political Economy
as the bridge which closes the circle formed by the action
of production, distribution and consumption. (Nat. Oek. III,
49.) One of the chief fore-runners of the view we advocate
was _McCulloch_, Principles, IV, 3 ff. _Gr. Soden_, Nat.
Oek., distinguishes economic consumption, un-economic and
anti-economic consumption. (Nat. Oek., I, 147.)]
SECTION CCXIII.
EQUILIBRIUM BETWEEN PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION.
In all cases economic production is a means to some kind of consumption
as its end.[213-1] The sharpest spur to productive activity is the
feeling of want.[213-2] "Want teaches art, want teaches prayer, blessed
want!" Well too has it been said: "Necessity is the mother of
invention!" Leaving mere animals out of consideration,[213-3] those men
who experience very few wants, with the exception of some rare and
highly intellectual natures, prefer rest to labor. Therefore, when
European merchants desire to engage in trade with a savage nation they
have uniformly to begin by sending them their nails, axes,
looking-glasses, brandy, etc., as gifts. Not until the savage has
experienced a new enjoyment does the want of continuing it make itself
felt; or is he prepared to produce for purposes of commerce.[213-4] In a
state of normal development, the complete and continuing satisfaction of
the coarser wants should constitute the foundation for the
higher.[213-5]
[Footnote 213-1: We should not, indeed, say, on this
account, with _Adam Smith_, IV, ch. 8, that "consumption is
the sole end and purpose of all production," for labor and
saving, besides their economic object have a higher one,
imperishable and personal. Compare _Knies_, Polit. Oek. 129,
and _supra_, § 30.]
[Footnote 213-2: According to _Sir F. M. Eden_, State of the
Poor, I, 254, it is one of the most unambiguous symptoms of
advanced civilization when families eat regularly at the
same table; so also sleeping in real beds. "Bed and board!"
It is said that the regularity of meal times was introduced
among the Greeks by Palamedes. _Athen._ I, 11, after
_Æschylus_.]
[Footnote 213-3: Hibernating animals have supplies and
dwellings, that is something analogous to capital.]
[Footnote 213-4: This advance is generally observed to be
introduced by the _jus fortioris_. _Steuart_, Principles I,
ch. 7. (Compare §§ 45-6-8.) In this way, the earliest
oriental despotisms have unwittingly been of great service
to mankind. What the sultan here accomplished with his few
favorites was done in the lower stages of civilization of
the west by the aristocracy of great vassals, in a manner
more worthy of human beings, and in a much more stable form.
(_J. S. Mill_, Principles I, 14 ff.)]
[Footnote 213-5: _Banfield_, Organization of Industry, 1848,
11.]
SECTION CCXIV.
CAUSES OF AN INCREASE OF PRODUCTION.
Only when wants increase does production increase also.[214-1] The old
maxim: _Si quem volueris esse divitem, non est quod augeas divitias, sed
minuas cupiditates (Seneca)_, would, if consistently carried out, have
thwarted the advance of civilization and frustrated the improvement of
man's condition. On the other hand, most political economists, without
more ado, assume that individuals, and still more nations, are wont to
extend the aggregate of their enjoyments just as far as there is a
possibility of satisfying their wants. But they forget here how great a
part is played in the world, as men are constituted, by the principle of
inertia.[214-2] At the first blush, what seems more natural than that
the less labor a people need employ to obtain the most indispensable
means of subsistence, the more time and taste would remain to them to
satisfy their more refined wants. According to this, we should expect to
discover a more refined civilization, especially, in intellectual
matters, in the earliest periods, when population is small, when land
exists in excess and is not yet exhausted. But, in reality, precisely
the reverse is the case. In the earliest stages of civilization
accessible to our observation, we find materialism prevailing in its
coarsest form, and life absorbed entirely by the lowest physical wants.
(Tropical lands.) Where bread grows on the trees, and one needs only to
reach out his hand and pluck it; where all one wants to cover his
nakedness is a few palm leaves, ordinary souls find no incentive to an
ant-like activity, or to a union among themselves for economic
purposes.[214-3] When a Mexican countryman earns enough to keep himself
and his family from absolute want by two days' labor in a week, he idles
away the other five. It never occurs to him that he might devote his
leisure time to putting his hut or his household furniture, etc., in
better shape. The necessity of foresight even is almost unknown; and in
the most luxuriantly fertile country in the world, a bad harvest
immediately leads to the most frightful famine. Humboldt was assured
that there was no hope of making the people more industrious except by
the destruction of the banana plantations.[214-4] But, indeed, there
would be little gained by such compulsory industry. To work for any
other end than satiation, it is necessary that man should feel wants
beyond the want created by mere hunger.[214-5] There are so many
conditions precedent (and mutually limiting one another) to a general
advance in civilization, that such an advance can, as a rule, take place
only very gradually. Let us suppose, for instance, a single Indian in
Mexico, perfectly willing to work six days in the week, and in this way
to cultivate a piece of land three times as great as his fellow Indians.
Where would he get the land? He would, for a time find no purchasers for
his surplus, and therefore not be in a condition to pay the landlord as
much as the latter hitherto received from the pasturage alone. Not until
cities are built and offer the rural population the products of industry
in exchange for theirs, can they be incited to, or become capable of
effecting a better cultivation of the land. This incentive and this
capacity, are inseparably connected with each other. Where the
agricultural population produce no real surplus, but after the fashion
of medieval times, produce everything they want themselves, and consume
all their own products with the exception of the part paid to the state
as a tax, there can scarcely be an industrial class, a commercial class,
or a class devoted to science, art, etc. And, conversely, it is only the
higher civilization which finds expression in the development of these
classes, that, by a more skillful guidance of the national labor, can
call forth its productiveness to an extent sufficient to yield a
considerable surplus of agricultural commodities over and above the most
immediate wants of the cultivators of the soil themselves. Hence, we
find that precisely in those countries which are most advanced in the
economic sense, there is relatively the smallest number of men engaged
in agriculture, and relatively the largest number in production of a
finer kind.[214-6] It is here as in private housekeeping: the poorer a
man is, the greater is the portion of his income which he is wont to lay
out for indispensable necessities.[214-7] [214-8]
[Footnote 214-1: There is obviously here supposed besides
the want thus increased, a capacity for development. Thus,
for instance, the inhabitants of New Zealand brought with
them, in what concerns clothing, dwellings, etc., the
customs of a tropical into a colder country, and did not
understand how to oppose the rigor of the new climate,
except by building immoderately large fires, until they
became acquainted with European teachers. (Edinb. Review,
April, 1850, 466.)]
[Footnote 214-2: Compare _R. S. Zachariä_, Vierzig Bücher
vom Staate, VII, 37. Men in the lower stages of civilization
cherish a greater contempt for those more advanced than they
are themselves visited with by the latter. Thus it was
customary for the Siberian hunting races to utter a
malediction: May your enemy live like a Tartar, and have the
folly to engage in the breeding of cattle. (_Abulghazi
Bahadur_, Histoire généalogique des Tartares.) Nomadic races
look upon the inhabitants of cities as for the most part
prisoners.]
[Footnote 214-3: The "happy, contented negroes," as Lord
John Russel called them, work in Jamaica, on an average,
only one hour a day since their emancipation. (Colonial
Magazine, Nov. 1849, 458.) Egypt, India, etc., from time
immemorial, the classic lands of monkish laziness. Compare
_Hume_, Discourses, No. 1, on Commerce. On the other hand,
the person who has six months before him for which he must
labor and lay up a store, if he would not famish or freeze,
must necessarily be active and frugal; and there are other
virtues which go along with these. (_List_, System der
polit. Oek., I, 304.) According to _Humboldt_, the change of
seasons compels man to get accustomed to different kinds of
food, and thus fits him to migrate. The inhabitants of
tropical countries are, on the other hand, like
caterpillars, which cannot emigrate nor be made to emigrate,
on account of the uniform nature of their food.]
[Footnote 214-4: _Humboldt_, N. Espagne, IV, ch. 9, II, ch.
5. Similarly among the coarser Malayan tribes, the facility
with which fish is caught and the cheapness of sago are the
principal causes of their inertia and of their unprogressive
uncivilization. (_Crawfurd._)]
[Footnote 214-5: _Le travail de la faim est toujours borné
comme elle. (Raynal.)_]
[Footnote 214-6: Compare _Adam Smith_, I, ch. 11, 2;
_supra_, § 54. In Russia, nearly 80 per cent. of the
population live immediately from agriculture; in Great
Britain, in 1835, only 35; in 1821, only 33; in 1831, only
31-1/2; in 1841, only 26 per cent. (_Porter._) According to
_Marshall_, there were, in 1831, in British Europe,
1,116,000 persons who lived from their rents, etc. In
Ireland, there were, in 1831, over 65 per cent. of the
population engaged in agriculture (_Porter_); in 1841, even
66 per cent.]
[Footnote 214-7: In Paris, in 1834, the average income per
capita was estimated to be 1,029.9 francs, of which 46
francs were paid out for service; 55.7 for education; 11.5
for physicians' services, etc.; 7 on theatrical shows; 36
for washing; 13.6 for public purposes. (_Dingler_, Polyt.
Journal, LIII, 464.) According to _Ducpétiaux_, Budgets
économiques des Classes ouvrières en Belgique, 1855, and
_Engel_, Sächs. Statist. Ztschr., 1857, 170, the
proportional percentage of family expenses for the following
articles of consumption is:
=======================+=========================================
| EXPENSES OF
+--------------------+----------+---------
| _a laborer's_ | _family_ |_a well-_
| _family_ | _of the_ |_to-do_
_Consumption Purpose._ | _in comfortable_ | _middle_ |_family._
| _circumstances._ | _class._ |
+----------+---------+----------+---------
| _In_ | _In_ | _In_ | _In_
|_Belgium._|_Saxony._|_Saxony._ |_Saxony._
| _per_ | _per_ | _per_ | _per_
| _cent._ | _cent._ | _cent._ | _cent._
-----------------------+----------+---------+----------+---------
Food, | 61 \ | 62 \ | 55 \ | 50 \
Clothing, | 15 } | 16 } 95 | 18 } 90 | 18 } 85
Shelter, | 10 } 95 | 12 } | 12 } | 12 }
Heating and lighting, | 5 } | 5 / | 5 / | 5 /
Utensils and tools, | 4 / | | |
| | | |
Education, instruction,| 2 \ | 2 \ | 3.5 \ | 5.5 \
Public security, | 1 } 5 | 1 } 5 | 2 } 10 | 3 } 15
Sanitary purposes, | 1 } | 1 } | 2 } | 3 }
Personal services, | 1 / | 1 / | 2.5 / | 3.5 /
=======================+==========+=========+==========+=========
Hence _Engel_ thinks that when the articles of food,
clothing, shelter, heating and lighting have become dearer
by 50 per cent., and other wants have not, and it is desired
to proportionately increase the salaries of officials,
salaries of 300, 600 and 1,000 thalers should be raised to
427.5, 800 and 1,275 thalers respectively. (Preuss. Statist.
Zeitschr., 1875.) _E. Herrmann_, Pricipien der Wirthsch.,
106, estimates that in all Europe, 45.6 of all consumption
is for food, 13.2 for clothing, 5.7 for shelter, 4.6 for
furnishing, 5.3 for heating and lighting, 2.6 for tools and
utensils, 13.3 for public security, 6.6 for purposes of
recreation. Compare _Leplay_, Les Ouvriers Européens, 1855,
and _v. Prittwitz_, Kunst reich zu werden, 487 ff. The
expenses for shelter, service and sociability are specially
apt to increase with an increase of income.]
[Footnote 214-8: The necessity of an equilibrium between
production and consumption was pretty clear to many of the
older political economists. Thus, for instance, _Petty_
calls the coarse absence of the feeling of higher wants
among the Irish the chief cause of their idleness and
poverty. Similarly _Temple_, Observations on the N.
Provinces, ch. 6, in which Ireland and Holland are compared
in this relation. _North_, Discourses upon Trade, 14 seq.;
Potscr. _Roscher_, Zur Geschichte der english.
Volswirthschaftslehre, 83, 91, 127 ff. _Becher_, polit.
Discurs., 1668, 17 ff., was of opinion that the principal
cause keeping the three great estates together, the very
soul of their connection, was consumption. Hence the peasant
lived from the tradesman, and the tradesman from the
merchant. (_Boisguillebert_, Détail de la France, I, 4, II,
9, 21.) According to _Berkeley_, Querist, No. 20, 107, the
awakening of wants is the most probable way to lead a people
to industry. And so _Hume_, loc. cit., _Forbonnais_,
Eléments du Commerce, I, 364. The Physiocrates were in favor
of active consumption. Thus _Quesnay_, Maximes générales, 21
seq.; _Letrosne_, De l'Interêt social, I, 12. _La
reproduction et la consommation sont réciproquement la
mesure l'une de l'autre._ Some of them considered
consumption even as the chief thing (_Mirabeau_, Philosophie
rurale, ch. 1), which could never be too great. Further,
_Verri_, Meditazioni, I, 1-4. _Büsch_, Geldumlauf, III, 11
ff.
The moderns have frequently inequitably neglected the
doctrine of consumption. Thus it appears to be a very
characteristic fact that in _Adam Smith's_ great book, there
is no division bearing the title "consumption," and in the
Basel edition of 1801, that word does not occur in the
index. _Droz_ says that in reading the works of certain of
his followers, one might think that products were not made
for the sake of man, but man for their sake. But, on the
other hand, there came a strong reaction with _Lauderdale_,
Inquiry, ch. 5; _Sismondi_, N. Principes, L., II, passim;
_Ganilh_, Dictionnaire Analytique, 93 ff., 159 ff.; but
especially, and with important scientific discoveries,
_Malthus_, Principles, B. II. _St. Chamans_, Nouvel Essai
sur la Richesse des Nations, 1824, is an exaggerated
caricature of the theory of consumption. For instance, he
resolves the income of individuals into foreign demand or
the demand of strangers (29); considers the first condition
of public credit to lie in the making of outlay (32); and
even calls entirely idle consumers productive, for the
reason that they elevate by their demand a _utilité
possible_, to the dignity of a _utilité réelle_ (286 ff.)
The view advocated by Mirabeau, and referred to above, again
represented by _E. Solly_, Considerations on Political
Economy, 1814, and by _Weishaupt_, Ueb. die Staatsausgaben
und Auflagen, 1819. And so according to _Carey_, Principles,
ch. 35, § 6, the real difficulty does not lie in production,
but in finding a purchaser for the products. But he
overlooks the fact here that only the possessor of other
products can appear as a purchaser. From another side, most
socialists think almost exclusively of the wants of men, and
scarcely consider it worth their while to pay any attention
to the means of satisfying them.]
SECTION CCXV.
NECESSITY OF THE PROPER SIMULTANEOUS DEVELOPMENT OF PRODUCTION AND
CONSUMPTION.
Hence, one of the most essential conditions of a prosperous national
economy is that the development of consumption should keep equal pace
with that of production, and supply with demand.[215-1] The growth of a
nation's economy naturally depends on this: that production should
always be, so to speak, one step in advance of consumption, just as the
organism of the animal body grows from the fact that the secretions
always amount to something less than the amount of additional nutrition.
A preponderance of secretions would here be disease; but so would be a
too great preponderance of nutrition. Now, the politico-economical
disease which is produced by the lagging behind of consumption and by
the supply being much in advance of the demand, is called a commercial
(market) crisis. Its immediate consequence is, that for a great many
commodities produced, no purchasers can be found. The effect of this is
naturally to lower prices. The profit of capital and wages diminish. A
transition into another branch of production, not overcrowded, is either
not possible at all or is attended with care, great difficulties and
loss. It is very seldom that all these disadvantages are confined to the
one branch in which the disease had its original seat. For, since the
resources of the one class of producers have diminished, they cannot
purchase as much from others as usual. The most distant members of the
politico-economic body may be thereby affected.[215-2]
[Footnote 215-1: _Boisguillebert_ lays the greatest weight
on the harmony of the different branches of commerce.
_L'équilibre l'unique conservateur de l'opulence générale_;
this depends on there being always as many sales as
purchases. The moment one link in the great chain suffers,
all the others sympathise. Hence he opposes all taxation of
commodities which would destroy this harmony. (Nature des
Richesses, ch. 4, 5, 6; Factum de la France, ch. 4; Tr. des
Grains I, 1.) _Canard_ Principes d'E. politique, ch. 6,
compares the relation between production and consumption in
national economy with that between arteries and veins in the
animal body. On the other hand, _Sismondi_, N. Principes I,
381, describes the bewilderment and want which are wont to
arise when one wheel of the great politico-economical
machine turns round more rapidly than the others.]
[Footnote 215-2: Thus, for instance, an occasional
stagnation of the cotton factories of Lancashire has
frequently the effect of "making all England seem like a
sick man twisting and turning on his bed of pain." (_L.
Faucher._)]
SECTION CCXVI.
COMMERCIAL CRISES IN GENERAL.--A GENERAL GLUT.
The greater number of such crises are doubtless special; that is, it is
only in some branches of trade that supply outweighs demand. Most
theorists deny the possibility of a general glut, although many
practitioners stubbornly maintain it.[216-1] J. B. Say relies upon the
principle that in the sale of products, as contradistinguished from
gifts, inheritances, etc., payment can always be made only in other
products. If, therefore, in one branch there be so much supplied that
the price declines; as a matter of course, the commodity wanted in
exchange will command all the more, and, therefore, have a better vent.
In the years 1812 and 1813, for instance, it was almost impossible to
find a market for dry goods and other similar products. Merchants
everywhere complained that nothing could be sold. At the same time,
however, corn, meat and colonial products were very dear, and,
therefore, paid a large profit to those who supplied them.[216-2] Every
producer who wants to sell anything brings a demand into the market
exactly corresponding to his supply. (_J. Mill._) Every seller is _ex vi
termini_ also a buyer; if, therefore production is doubled, purchasing
power is also doubled. (_J. S. Mill._) Supply and demand are in the last
analysis, really, only two different sides of one and the same
transaction. And as long as we see men badly fed, badly clothed, etc.,
so long, strictly speaking, shall we be scarcely able to say that too
much food or too much clothing has been produced.[216-3]
[Footnote 216-1: When those engaged in industrial pursuits
speak of a lasting and ever-growing over-production, they
have generally no other reason for their complaints than the
declining of the rate of interest and of the undertaker's
profit which always accompany an advance in civilization.
Compare _J. S. Mill_, Principles, III, ch. 14, 4. However,
the same author, I, 403, admits the possibility of something
similar to a general over-production.]
[Footnote 216-2: _Say's_ celebrated Théorie des Débouchés,
called by McCulloch his chief merit, Traité, I, ch. 15. At
about the same time the same theory was developed by _J.
Mill_, Commerce defended, 1808. _Ricardo's_ express
adhesion, Principles, ch. 21. Important germs of the theory
may be traced much farther back: _Mélon_, Essai politique
sur le Commerce, 1734, ch. 2; _Tucker_, On the
Naturalization Bill, 13; Sketch of the Advance and Decline
of Nations, 1795, 182.]
[Footnote 216-3: Precisely the same commercial crisis, that
of 1817 seq., which more than anything else led _Sismondi_
to the conclusion that too much had been produced in all
branches of trade, may most readily be reduced to _Say's_
theory.
There was then a complaint, not only in Europe but also in
America, Hindoostan, South Africa and Australia, of the
unsaleableness of goods, overfull stores, etc.; but this,
when more closely examined, was found to be true only of
manufactured articles and raw material, of clothing and
objects of luxury; while the coarser means of subsistence
found an excellent market, and were sold even at the highest
prices. Hence, in this case, there was by no means any such
thing as over-production. The trouble was that in the
cultivation of corn and other similar products, too little
was produced. There was a bad harvest even in 1816.
The most important authorities in favor of the possibility
of a general glut are _Sismondi_, N. Principes, IV, ch. 4,
and in the Revue encyclopédique, Mai, 1824: Sur la Balance
des Consommations avec les Productions. Opposed by Say in
the same periodical (Juilliet, 1824); where the controversy
was afterwards reopened in June and July, 1827, by
_Sismondi_ and _Dunoyer_. Compare Etudes, vol. I; _Ganilh_,
Théorie, II, 348 ff.; _Malthus_, Principles, II, ch. 1, 8.
Compare _Rau_, _Malthus_ and Say, über die Ursachen der
jetzigen Handelsstockung, 1821. _Malthus'_ views were
surpassed by _Chalmers_, On Political Economy in Connexion
with the moral State of Society, 1832. But even _Malthus_
himself in his Definitions, ch. 10, No. 55, later, so
defined a "general glut" that there could be no longer
question of his holding to its universality. For an
impartial criticism, see especially _Hermann_, Staatsw.
Untersuchungen, 251, and _M. Chevalier_, Cours, 1, Leçon,
3.]
SECTION CCXVII.
COMMERCIAL CRISES IN GENERAL.
All these allegations are undoubtedly true, in so far as the whole world
is considered one great economic system, and the aggregate of all goods,
including the medium of circulation, is borne in mind. The consolation
which might otherwise lie herein is made indeed to some extent
unrealizable by these conditions. It must not be forgotten in practice
that men are actuated by other motives than that of consuming as much as
possible.[217-1] As men are constituted, the full consciousness of this
possibility is not always found in connection with the mere power to do,
to say nothing of the will to do.[217-2] There are, everywhere, certain
consumption-customs corresponding with the distribution of the national
income. Every great and sudden change in the latter is therefore wont to
produce a great glut of the market.[217-3] The party who in such case
wins, is not wont to extend his consumption as rapidly as the loser has
to curtail his; partly for the reason that the former cannot calculate
his profit as accurately as the latter can his loss.[217-4]
Thus laws, the barriers interposed by tariffs, etc., may hinder the
too-much of one country to flow over into the too-little of another.
England, for instance might be suffering from a flood of manufactured
articles and the United States from an oppressive depreciation in the
value of raw material; but the tariff-laws places a hermetic dike
between want on one side and superfluity on the other. Strong national
antipathies and great differences of taste stubbornly adhered to may
produce similar effects; for instance between the Chinese and Europeans.
Even separation in space, especially when added to by badness of the
means of transportation may be a sufficient hinderance especially when
transportation makes commodities so dear that parties do not care to
exchange. In such cases, it is certainly imaginable that there should be
at once a want of proper vent or demand for all commodities; provided,
we look upon each individual class of commodities the world over as one
whole, and admit the exception that in individual places, certain parts
of the whole more readily find a market because of the general crisis.
Lastly, the mere introduction of trade by money destroys as it were the
use of the whole abstract theory.[217-5] So long as original barter
prevailed, supply and demand met face to face. But by the intervention
of money, the seller is placed in a condition to purchase only after a
time, that is, to postpone the other half of the exchange-transaction as
he wishes. Hence it follows that supply does not necessarily produce a
corresponding demand in the real market. And thus a general crisis may
be produced, especially by a sudden diminution of the medium of
circulation.[217-6] And so, many very abundant harvests, which have
produced a great decline in the value of raw material, and no less so a
too large fixation of capital which stops before its completion,[217-7]
may lead to general over-production. In a word, production does not
always carry with itself the guaranty that it shall find a proper
market, but only when it is developed in all directions, where it is
progressive and in harmony with the whole national economy. To use
Michel Chevalier's expression, the saliant angles of the one-half must
correspond to the re-entrant angles of the other, or confusion will
reign everywhere. Even in individual industrial enterprises, the proper
combination of the different kinds of labor employed in them is an
indispensable condition of success. Let us suppose a factory in which
there are separate workmen occupied with nothing but the manufacture of
ramrods. If these now exceed the proper limits of their production and
have manufactured perhaps ten times as many ramrods as can be used in a
year, can their colleagues, employed in the making of the locks or
butt-ends of the gun, profit by their outlay? Scarcely. There will be a
stagnation of the entire business, because part of its capital is
paralyzed, and all the workmen will suffer damage.[217-8] [217-9]
[Footnote 217-1: As _Ferguson_, History of Civil Society,
says, the person who thinks that all violent passions are
produced by the influence of gain or loss, err as greatly as
the spectators of Othello's wrath who should attribute it to
the loss of the handkerchief.]
[Footnote 217-2: If all the rich were suddenly to become
misers, live on bread and water, and go about in the
coarsest clothing, etc., it would not be long before all
commodities, the circulating medium excepted, would feel the
want of a proper market--all, including even the most
necessary means of subsistence, because a multitude of
former consumers, having no employment, would be obliged to
discontinue their demand. Over-production would be greater
yet if a great and general improvement in the industrial
arts or in the art of agriculture had gone before. Compare,
_Lauderdale_ Inquiry, 88. This author calls attention to the
fact that a market in which the middle class prevails must
put branches of production in operation very different from
those put in operation where there are only a few over-rich
people, and numberless utterly poor ones: England, the
United States--the East Indies, and France before the
Revolution. (Ch. 5, especially p. 358.)]
[Footnote 217-3: If England, for instance, became bankrupt
as a nation, the country would not therefore become richer
or poorer. The national creditors would lose about
£28,000,000 per annum, but the taxpayers would save that sum
every year. Now, of the former, there are not 300,000
families; of the latter there are at least 5,000,000. Hence,
the loss would there amount to £100 a family per annum, and
the gain here to not £6 per family. We may therefore assume
with certainty that the two items would not balance each
other as to consumption. The creditors of the nation, a
numerous, and hitherto a largely consuming class, now
impoverished, would be obliged to curtail their demand for
commodities of every kind to a frightful extent; while a
great many taxpayers would not feel justified in basing an
immediate increase of their demand on so small a saving.
Other revolutions, more political in character, may operate
in the same direction by despoiling a brilliant court, a
luxurious nobility or numerous official classes of their
former income.]
[Footnote 217-4: The above truth has been exaggerated by
Malthus and his school into the principle that a numerous
class of "unproductive consumers," who consume more than
they produce, is indispensable to a flourishing national
economy. From this point of view, the magnitude of England's
debt especially has been made a subject of congratulation.
Compare _Malthus_, Principles, II, ch. 1, 9. Similarly
_Ortes_, E. N., III, 17, to whom even the _impostori
mezzani_ and _ladri_ seem to be a kind of necessity. (III,
23.) _Chalmers_, Political Economy, III ff. If it was only
question of consumption here, all that would be needed would
be to throw away the commodities produced in excess. Those
writers forget that a consumer, to be desirable, should be
able to offer counter-values.]
[Footnote 217-5: _Malthus_, Principles, II, ch. 1, 3.]
[Footnote 217-6: Let us suppose a country which has been
used to effecting all its exchanges by means of
$100,000,000. All prices have been fixed, or have regulated
themselves accordingly. Let us now suppose that there has
been a sudden exportation of $10,000,000, and under such
circumstances as to delay the rapid filling up of the gap
thus created. In the long run, the demand of a country for a
circulation may be satisfied just as well with $90,000,000
as with $100,000,000; only it is necessary in the first
instance that the circulation should be accelerated or that
the price of money should rise 10 per cent. But neither of
these accommodations is possible immediately. In the
beginning, sellers will refuse to part with their goods 10
per cent. cheaper than they have been wont to. But so long
as those engaged in commercial transactions have not become
completely conscious of the revolution which has taken place
in prices, and do not act accordingly, there is evidently a
certain ebb in the channels of trade, and simultaneously in
all. Demand and supply are kept apart from each other by the
intervention of a generally prevailing error concerning the
real price of the medium of circulation, and there must be,
although only temporarily, buyers wanted by every seller,
except the seller of money. In a country with a paper
circulation, every great depreciation of the value of the
paper money not produced by a corresponding increase of the
same, may produce such results. _Say_ is wrong when he says
that a want of instruments of exchange may be always
remedied immediately and without difficulty.]
[Footnote 217-7: Suppose a people, the country population of
which produce annually $100,000,000 in corn over and above
their own requirements, and thus open a market for those
engaged in industrial pursuits to the extent of
$100,000,000. And suppose that in consequence of three
plentiful harvests, and because of an inability to export,
the market should grow to be over-full, to such an extent
that the much greater stores of corn have now (§ 5, 103) a
much smaller value in exchange than usual. The latter may
have declined to $70,000,000. Hence the country people now
can buy from the cities only $70,000,000 of city wares. The
cities, therefore, suffer from over-production. That people
dispensing with the use of money should establish an
immediate trade between wheat and manufactured articles, in
which case the latter would exchange against a large
quantity of the former, is not practicable, because no one
can extend his consumption of corn beyond the capacity of
his stomach, and the storage of wheat with the intention of
selling it when the price advances is attended with the
greatest difficulties.]
[Footnote 217-8: If, for instance, there are too many
railroads in process of construction, all other commodities
may in consequence lose in demand, and when the further
construction begins to be arrested on account of a
superfluity of roads, the new rail factories, etc. are
involved in the crisis.]
[Footnote 217-9: On the special pathology and therapeutics
of this economic disease, compare _Roscher_, Die
Productionskrisen, mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die letzen
Jahrzente in the Gegenwart, Brockhaus, 1849, Bd., III, 721
ff., and his Ansichten der Volkswirthschaft, 1861, 279 ff.]
SECTION CCXVIII
PRODIGALITY AND FRUGALITY.
Prodigality is less odious than avarice, less irreconcilable with
certain virtues, but incomparably more detrimental to a nation's
economy. The miser's treasures, even when they have been buried, may be
employed productively, at least, after his death; but prodigality
_destroys_ resources. So, too, avarice is a repulsive vice, extravagance
a seductive one. The practice of frugality[218-1] in every day life is
as far removed from one extreme as the other. It is the "daughter of
wisdom, the sister of temperance and the mother of freedom." Only with
its assistance can liberality be true, lasting and successful. It is, in
short, reason and virtue in their application to consumption.[218-2]
[218-3]
[Footnote 218-1: Negatively: the principle of sparing;
positively: the principle of making the utmost use of
things. (_Schäffle_, Kapitalismus und Socialismus, 27.)]
[Footnote 218-2: Admirable description of economy in _B.
Franklin's_ Pennsylvanian Almanac, How poor Rich. Saunders
got rich; also in _J. B. Say_, Traité, III, ch. 5. _Adam
Smith_, W. of N., II, ch. 3, endeavors to explain why it is
that, on the whole and on a large scale, the principle of
economy predominates over the seductions of extravagance.
This, however, is true only of progressive nations.]
[Footnote 218-3: The Savior Himself in His miracles, the
highest pattern of economy: _Matth._, 14, 20; _Mark_, 6, 43;
8, 8; _Luke_, 9, 17; _John_, 6, 12. That He did not intend
to prohibit thereby all noble luxury is shown by passages
such as _Matth._, 26, 6 ff.; _John_, 2, 10.]
SECTION CCXIX.
EFFECT OF PRODIGALITY.
Prodigality destroys goods which either were capital or might have
become capital. But, at the same time, it either directly or indirectly
increases the demand for commodities. Hence, for a time, it raises not
only the interest of capital, but the prices of many commodities.
Consumers naturally suffer in consequence; many producers make a profit
greater than that usual in the country until such time as the
equilibrium between supply and demand has been restored by an increase
of the supply of the coveted products. But the capital of spendthrifts
is wont to be suddenly exhausted; demand suddenly decreases, and
producers suffer a crisis. As Benjamin Franklin says, he who buys
superfluities will at last have to sell necessities. Thus the
extravagance of a court may contribute to the rapid prosperity of a
place of princely residence.[219-1] But it should not be forgotten that
all the food-sap artificially carried there had to be previously
withdrawn from the provinces. The clear loss caused by the destruction
of wealth should also be borne in mind.[219-2] [219-3]
[Footnote 219-1: A rapid change of hands by money, as it is
called in every day life. See, _per contra_, _Tucker_,
Sermons, 31, 1774.]
[Footnote 219-2: Only the superficial observer is apt to
notice this apparent prosperity of the capital much more
readily than the decline of the rest of the country, which
covers so much more territory. In like manner, many wars
have had the appearance of promoting industry, for the
reason that some branches grew largely in consequence of the
increased demand of the state; but they grew at the expense
of all others which had to meet the increased taxes. Compare
_Jacob_ in _Lowe_, England nach seinem gegenwartigen
Zustande, 1823, cap. 2, 3; _Nebenius_, Oeffentlicher Credit,
I, Aufl., 419 ff.; _Hermann_, department of the Seine,
amounted, in 1850, to 497,000,000 francs; in the department
of the Bouches du Rhone, to 39,000,000 francs; in 1855, on
the other hand, they were, on account of the war,
887,000,000 francs and 141,000,000. (Journal des Econ.,
Juil., 1857, 32 ff.)]
[Footnote 219-3: The Journal des Economistes for March,
1854, very clearly shows, in opposition to the
state-sophists who recommended extravagant balls, etc. as a
means of advancing industry, and who even advocated the
paying officials higher salaries on this account, and making
greater outlays by them compulsory, that such luxury when it
comes of itself may be a symptom of national wealth, but
that it is a very bad means to produce prosperity
artificially.]
SECTION CCXX.
WHEN SAVING IS INJURIOUS.
The act of saving, if the consumption omitted was a productive one, is
detrimental to the common good; because now a real want of the national
economy remains unsatisfied.[220-1] The effecting of savings by
curtailing unproductive consumption may embarrass those who had
calculated on its continuance. But its utility or damage to the whole
national economy will depend on the application or employment of what is
saved. Here two different cases are possible.
A. It is stored up and remains idle. If this happens to a sum of money,
the number of instruments of exchange in commerce is diminished. Hence,
in consequence, there may be either a general fall in the price of
commodities, or some commodities may remain unsold; that is, according
to § 217, a commercial crisis of greater or smaller extent.[220-2] If it
be objects of immediate consumption that are stored up and lie idle,
articles of food or clothing, for instance, the price of such
commodities is wont to be raised by the new and unusual demand for them,
precisely as it is lowered afterwards when the stores are suddenly
opened and thrown upon the market.[220-3]
B. If the saving effected be used to create fixed capital, there is as
much consumption of goods, the same support of employed workmen, the
same sale for industrial articles as in the previous unproductive
consumption; only, there the stream is usually conducted into other
channels. If a rich man now employs in house-building what he formerly
paid out to mistresses; masons, carpenters, etc. earn what was formerly
claimed by hair-dressers, milliners, etc.: there is less spent for
truffles and champagne and more for bread and meat. The last result is a
house which adds permanently either to personal enjoyment, or
permanently increases the material products of the nation's
economy.[220-4] And it is just so when the wealth saved is used as
circulating capital. Here, the wealth saved is consumed in a shorter or
longer time; and to superficial observers, this saving might seem like
destruction; but it is distinguished from the last by this, that it
always reproduces its full equivalent and more. However, the whole
quantity of goods brought into the market by such new capital cannot be
called its product. Only the use (_Nützung_) of the new capital can be
so called; that is the holding together or the development in some other
way of other forces which were already in existence until their
achievements are perfected and ready for sale.[220-5] [220-6]
[Footnote 220-1: What evil influences such saving can have
may be seen from Prussian frugality in its military system
before 1806.]
[Footnote 220-2: The custom of burying treasure is produced
by a want of security (compare _Montanari_, Delia Moneta,
1683-87, 97 Cust.), and by an absence of the spirit which
leads to production. As _Burke_ says, where property is not
sacred, gold and silver fly back into the bosom of the earth
whence they came. Hence, in the middle ages, this custom was
frequent, and is yet, in most oriental despotic countries.
(_Montesquieu_, E. des L., XXII, 2.) And so in Arabia: _d'Arvieux_,
_Rosenmüller's_ translation, 61 seq. _Fontanier_, Voyage dans l'Inde
et dans le Golfe persique, 1644, I, 279. A Persian governor on his
death bed refused to give any information as to where he had buried
his treasure. His father had always murdered the slave who helped him
to bury his money or any part of it. (_Klemm_, Kulturgeschichte, VII,
220.) In lower stages of civilization, it is a very usual luxury to
have one's treasures buried with the corpse. In relation to David's
grave, see _Joseph._, Ant. Jud., VII, 15,3, XIII, 8, 4; XVI, 7, 1.
Hence the orientals believe that _every_ unknown ruin hides a
treasure, that every unintelligible inscription is a talisman to
discover it by, and that every scientific traveler is a
treasure-digger, (_v. Wrede_, R. in Hadhramaut, 113, 182 and
_passim_.) Similarly in Sicily. (_Rehfues_, Neuester Zustand von S.,
1807, I, 99.) In the East Indies every circumstance that weakens
confidence in the power of the government increases the frequency of
treasure-burial, as was noticed, for instance, after the Afghan
defeat. Treasure-burial by the Spanish peasantry (_Borrego_,
translated by Rottenkamp, 81), in Ireland (_Wakefield_, Account of I.
I, 593), in the interior of Russia (_Storch_, Handbuch, I, 142), and
among the Laplanders. The custom was very much strengthened among the
latter when, in 1813, they lost 80 per cent. by the bankruptcy of the
state through its paper money. (_Brooke_, Winter in Lapland, 1829,
119; compare _Blom_, Statistik von Norwegen, II, 205.) As during the
Thirty Years' War, so also in 1848, it is said that large amounts of
money were burned by the Silesian and Austrian peasantry. Much of it
is lost forever, but, on the whole, much treasure is wont to be found
where much is buried; governments there make it a regal right to
search for it.]
[Footnote 220-3: If the hoarding takes place in a time of superfluity,
and the restitution of the stores in a time of want, there is of
course no detrimental disturbance, but on the contrary the consequence
is a beneficent equilibrium of prices. This is the fundamental idea in
the storage of wheat.]
[Footnote 220-4: In the construction of national buildings, etc., we
have the following course of things: compulsory contributions made by
taxpayers, or an invitation to the national creditors to desist
somewhat from their usual amount of consumption, and to employ what is
saved in the building of canals, roads etc. In France, for instance,
after 1835, 100,000,000 francs per annum. (_M. Chevalier_, Cours, I,
109.) The higher and middle classes of England saved, not without much
trouble, however, between 1844 and 1858, £134,500,000 in behalf of
railway construction. _Tooke-Newmarch_.]
[Footnote 220-5: Such savings have sometimes been prescribed
by the state. In ancient Athens many prohibitions of
consumption in order to allow the productive capital to
first attain a certain height. Thus it was forbidden to
slaughter sheep until they had lambed, or before they were
shorn. (_Athen._, IX, 375, I. 9.) Similarly the old
prohibition of the exportation of figs. (Ibid., III, 74.)
Compare Petit. Leges. Atticae, V, 3. _Boeckh_,
Staatshaushaltung, I, 62 seq.]
[Footnote 220-6: The process of the transformation of
savings from a money-income, in a money-economy
(_Geldwirthschaft_), into other products, more closely
analyzed in _v. Mangoldt_, V. W. L., 152 ff.]
SECTION CCXXI.
LIMITS TO THE SAVING OF CAPITAL.
It may be seen from the foregoing, that the mere saving of capital, if
the nation is to be really enriched thereby, has its limits. Every
consumer likes to extend his consumption-supply and his capital in use
(_Gebrauchskapitalien_); but not beyond a certain point.[221-1] Besides,
as trade becomes more flourishing, smaller stores answer the same
purpose. And no intelligent man can desire his productive capital
increased except up to the limit that he expects a larger market for his
enlarged production. What merchant or manufacturer is there who would
rejoice or consider himself enriched, if the number of his customers and
their desire to purchase remaining the same, he saw his stores of
unsaleable articles increase every year by several thousands?
This is another difference between national resources or world resources
and private resources. The resources of a private person, which are only
a link in the whole chain of trade, and which are, therefore, estimated
at the value in exchange of their component parts should, indeed, always
be increased by savings made. (§ 8.) For even the most excessive
increase of supply in general, which largely lowers the price of a whole
class of commodities, will never reduce the price of individual
quantities of that commodity below zero, and scarcely to zero. It is
quite otherwise in the case of national or world resources which must be
estimated according to the value in use of their component parts. Every
utility supposes a want. Where, therefore, the want of a commodity has
not increased, and notwithstanding there is a continuing increase in the
supply, the only result must be a corresponding decrease in the utility
of each individual part.[221-2]
If a people were to save all that remained to them over and above their
most urgent necessities, they would soon be obliged to seek a wider
market in foreign countries, or loan their capital there; but they would
make no advance whatever in higher culture nor add anything to the
gladness of life.[221-3] On the other hand, if they would not save at
all, they would be able to extend their enjoyments only at the expense
of their capital and of their future. Yet these two extremes find their
correctives in themselves. In the former case, a glut of the market
would soon produce an increased consumption and a diminished production;
in the latter the reverse. The ideal of progress demands that the
increased outlay with increased production should be made only for
worthy objects, and chiefly by the rich, while the middle and lower
classes should continue to make savings and thus contribute to wipe out
differences of fortune.[221-4]
[Footnote 221-1: Up to this point, indeed, wants increase
with the means of their satisfaction. The man who has two
shirts always strives to get a dozen, while the person who
has none at all, very frequently does not care for even one.
And so the person who has silver spoons generally desires
also to possess silver candle-sticks and silver plates. On
Lucullus' 5,000 chlamydes, see _Horat._, Epist., I, 6, 40
ff.]
[Footnote 221-2: That consumption and saving are not two
opposites which exclude each other is one of _Adam Smith's_
most beautiful discoveries. See Wealth of Nat., II, ch. 3.
But compare _Pinto_, Du Crédit et de la Circulation, 1771,
335. Before his time most writers who were convinced of the
necessity of consumption were apologists of extravagance.
Thus _v. Schröder_, F. Schatz- und Rentkammer, 23 seq. 47,
172. Louis XIV.'s saying: "A King gives alms when he makes
great outlays." According to _Montesquieu_, Esprit des Louis
VII., 4, the poor die of hunger when the rich curtail their
expenses. This view, which must have found great favor among
the imitators of Louis XIV. and Louis XV. was entertained to
some extent by the Physiocrates; for instance, _Quesnay_,
Maximes générales, 21 seq. Compare _Turgot_, Oeuvres, éd,
_Dare_, 424 ff. On the other hand, _Adam Smith_, loc. cit.
says that the spendthrift is a public enemy, and the person
who saves a public benefactor. _Lauderdale_, Inquiry, 219,
reacts so forcibly against the one-sidedness which this
involves that he believes no circumstance possible "which
could so far change the nature of things as to turn
parsimony into a means of increasing wealth." In his polemic
against Pitts' sinking fund as inopportune and excessive, he
assumes that all sums saved in that way are completely
withdrawn from the national demand. See per contra
_Hufeland_ n. Grundlegung I, 32, 238. _Sismondi_, N. P. II,
ch. 6, with his distinction between _production_ and
_revenu_, is more moderate; the former is converted into the
latter only in as much as it is "realized," that is, finds a
consumer who desires it, and pays for it. Now only can the
producer rely on anything; can he restore his productive
capital, estimate his profit, and use it in consumption, and
lastly begin the whole business over again.... A stationary
country must remain stationary in everything. It cannot
increase its capital and widen its market while its
aggregate want remains unaltered. (IV, ch. 1.)]
[Footnote 221-3: Thus _John Stuart Mill_ thinks that the
American people derive from all their progress and all their
favorable circumstances only this advantage: "that the life
of the whole of one sex is devoted to dollar-hunting, and of
the other to breeding dollar-hunters." (IV, ch. 6, 2.) In
the popular edition of 1865, after the experience of the
American civil war, he materially modified this judgment.]
[Footnote 221-4: _Storch_, Nationaleinkommen, 125 ff. That
there is at least not too much to be feared from the making
of too great savings is shown by _Hermann_, St. Untersuch.,
371 seq. On the other hand, there is less wealth destroyed
by spendthrifts than is generally supposed, for spendthrifts
are most frequently cheated by men who make savings
themselves. (_J. S. Mill_, Principles, I, ch. 5, 5.)]
SECTION CCXXII.
SPENDTHRIFT NATIONS.
As there are extravagant and frugal individuals, so also are there
extravagant and frugal nations. Thus, for instance, we must ascribe
great national frugality to the Swiss. In many well-to-do families in
that country, it is a principle acted upon to require the daughters to
look to the results of their white sewing, instead of giving them
pin-money; to gather up the crumbs after coffee parties in the presence
of the guests, and to make soup of them afterwards, etc. Sons are
generally neither supported nor helped to any great extent by their
parents in their lifetime, and are required to found their own homes.
They, therefore, grow rich from inheritance only late in years, when
they are accustomed to a retired and modest mode of life, and have
little desire, from mere convenience sake, to change it for another. And
so Temple informs us that it never occurs to the Dutch that their outlay
should equal their income; and when this is the case they consider that
they have spent the year in vain. Such a mode of life would cost a man
his reputation there as much as vicious excess does in other countries.
The greatest order and the most accurate calculation of all outlay in
advance is found in union with this; so that Temple assures us he never
heard of a public or private building which was not finished at the time
stipulated for in advance.[222-1]
On the other hand, the Englishman lives rather luxuriantly. He is so
used to enjoying comparative abundance, that when English travelers see
the peasantry of the continent living in great frugality, they generally
attribute it to poverty and not to their disposition to make savings. If
England has grown rich, it is because of the colossal magnitude of its
production, which is still more luxuriant and abundant than its
consumption.[222-2] This contrast may be the effect in part of
nationality and climate;[222-3] but it is certainly the effect in part
also of a difference in the stage of civilization which these countries
have respectively reached. The elder Cato had a maxim that a widow
might, indeed, allow her fortune to diminish, but that it was a man's
duty to leave more behind him than he had inherited.[222-4] And how
prodigally did not the lords of the universe live in later times!
[Footnote 222-1: _Temple_, Observations on the U. Provinces,
Works, I, 136, 138 seq., 179. _Roscher_, Geschichte der
engl. Volkswirthschaftsl., 129. Thus, for instance, the
Richesse de Hollande, I, 305, describes a rich town near
Amsterdam in which a man with an income of 120,000 florins a
year expended probably only 1,000 florins per annum on
himself.]
[Footnote 222-2: As early a writer as _D. Defoe_, Giving
Alms no Charity! 1704, says: the English get estates; the
Dutch save them. An Englishman at that time with weekly
wages of 20 shillings just made ends meet; while a Dutchman
with the same grew rich, and left his children behind him in
very prosperous circumstances, etc. _L. Faucher_ draws a
similar contrast between his fellow countrymen and the
English. _Goethe's_ ingenuous observations (Werke, Bd., 23,
246, ed. of 1840) in his Italian journey, show that the
Italians, too, know how to save. _Molti pochi fanno un
assai!_ And so in Bohemia, the Czechs have a good reputation
for frugality, sobriety, etc. as workmen. They are more
frugal than the Germans, although all the larger businesses
belong to Germans, because when the Czech has saved
something, he prefers to return to his village to putting
his savings in jeopardy by speculation.]
[Footnote 222-3: Drunkenness a common vice of northern
people: thus in antiquity the Thracians (_Athen._, X, 42;
_Xenoph._, Exp. Cyri, VII, 3, 32), the Macedonians, for
instance, Philips (_Demosth._, Olynth., II, 23) and
Alexander's (_Plutarch_, Alex., 70; De Adulat, 13). To drink
like a Scythian, meant, among the Greeks, to drink like a
beast. (_Athen._, X, 427; _Herod._, VI, 84.) On North German
drunkenness in the 16th century, see _Seb. Münster_,
Cosmogr., 326, 730. _Kantzow_, Pomerania, II, 128.]
[Footnote 222-4: _Plutarch_, Cato, I, 21.]
SECTION CCXXIII.
THE MOST DETRIMENTAL KIND OF EXTRAVAGANCE.
The kind of extravagance which it is most natural we should desire to
see put an end to, is that which procures enjoyment to no one. I need
call attention only to the excessive durability and solidity of certain
buildings. It is more economical to build a house that will last 60
years for $10,000, than one which will last 400 years for $20,000; for
in 60 years the interest saved on the $10,000 would be enough to build
three such houses.[223-1] This is, of course, not applicable to houses
built as works of art, or only to produce an imposing effect. The object
the ancient Egyptians had in view in building their obelisks and
pyramids continues to be realized even in our day.
I might also call attention to the premature casting away of things
used. Our national economy has saved incredible sums since rags have
been manufactured into paper. In Paris 4,000 persons make a living from
what they pick up in the streets.[223-2]
[Footnote 223-1: Compare _Minard_, Notions élémentaires
d'Economie politique appliquée aux Travaux publics, 1850, 71
ff. He calls to mind the many strong castles of the age of
chivalry, the Roman aqueducts, theaters, etc., which are
still in a good state of preservation, but which can be used
by no one; so many bridges too narrow for our purposes, and
so many roads too steep. The sluices at Dunkirk, made 12.60
metres in width by Vauban, were made 16 meters wider in
1822, and still are too narrow for Atlantic steamships. In
England, private individuals have well learned to take all
this into account. Compare _J. B. Say_, Cours pratique,
translated by Morstadt, I, 454 ff.]
[Footnote 223-2: _Fregier_, Die gefährlichen Klassen,
translated 1840, I, 2, 38. In Yorkshire it is said that
woolen rags to the amount of £52,000,000 a year are
manufactured into useful articles. (_Tooke_,
Wool-Production, 196.) Compare The Use of Refuse: Quart.
Rev., April, 1868. On the ancient Greek ragpickers the
so-called spermologois, see _St. John_, The Hellenes, III,
91; on the Roman _Centonariis_: _Cato_, R. R., 135;
_Columella_, R. R., I, 8, 9; _Marquardt_, II, 476, V, 2,
187.]
CHAPTER II.
LUXURY.
SECTION CCXXIV.
LUXURY IN GENERAL.
The idea conveyed by the word luxury is an essentially relative one.
Every individual calls all consumption with which he can dispense
himself, and every class that which seems not indispensable to
themselves, luxury. The same is true of every age and nation. Just as
young people ridicule every old fashion as pedantry, every new fashion
is censured by old people as luxury.[224-1]
But (§ I) a higher civilization always finds expression in an increased
number and an increased urgency of satisfied wants. Yet, there is a
limit at which new or intensified wants cease to be an element of higher
civilization, and become elements of demoralization. Every immoral and
every unwise want exceeds this limit.[224-2] Immoral wants are not only
those the satisfaction of which wounds the conscience, but also those in
which the necessities of the soul are postponed to the affording of
superfluities to the body; and where the enjoyment of the few is
purchased at the expense of the wretchedness of the many. And not only
those are unwise or imprudent for which the voluntary outlay is greater
than one's income, but those also where the indispensable is made to
suffer for the dispensable.
Thus it was in Athens, in the time of Demosthenes, when the festivities
of the year cost more than the maintenance of the fleet; when Euripides'
tragedies came dearer to the people than the Persian war in former
times. There was even a law passed (Ol. 107,4) prohibiting the
application of the dramatic fund to purposes of war under pain of
death.[224-3]
In the history of any individual people, it may be shown with
approximate certainty at what point luxury exceeded its salutary limits.
But in the case of two different nations, it is quite possible that what
was criminal prodigality with the one, may have been a salutary
enjoyment of life with the other; in case their economic
(_wirthschaftlichen_) powers are different. Precisely as in the case of
individuals, where for instance, the daily drinking of table wine may be
simplicity in the rich and immoral luxury in the case of a poor father
of a family.[224-4] Healthy reason has this peculiarity, that where
people will not listen to it, it never hesitates to make itself felt.
(_Benjamin Franklin._)[224-5]
However, the luxury of a period always throws itself, by way of
preference, on those branches of commodities which are cheapest.
[Footnote 224-1: _Stuart_, Principles, II, ch. 30,
_Ferguson_, History of Civil Society, VI, 2. Thus
_Dandolus_, Chron. Venet., 247, tells of the wife of a doge
at Constantinople who was so given to luxury that she ate
with a golden fork instead of her fingers. But she was
punished for this outrage upon nature: her body began to
stink even while she was alive. In the introduction to
_Hollinshed's_ Chronicon, 1557, there is a bitter complaint
that, a short time previous, so many chimneys had been
erected in England, that so many earthen and tin dishes had
been introduced in the place of wooden ones. Another author
finds fault that oak was then used in building instead of
willow, and adds that formerly the men were of oak but now
of willow. _Slaney_, On rural Expenditure, 41. Compare
_Xenoph._, Cyrop., VIII, 8, 17.]
[Footnote 224-2: Biblically determined: _Romans_, 13, 14.]
[Footnote 224-3: _Plutarch_, De Gloria Athen., 348.
_Athen._, XIV, 623. Petit. Legg. Att., 385.]
[Footnote 224-4: _Livy_, XXXIV, 6 ff.]
[Footnote 224-5: Most writers who have treated of luxury at
all have generally confined themselves to inquiring whether
it was salutary or reprehensible. Aristippus and
Antisthenes, Diogenes, etc.; Epicureans and Stoics. The
latter were reproached with being bad citizens, because
their moderation in all things was a hindrance to trade.
(_Athen._, IV, 163.) The Aristotelian _Herakleides_ declared
luxury to be the principal means to inspire men with
noble-mindedness; inspired by luxury, the Athenians
conquered at Marathon. (_Athen._, XII, 512.) _Pliny_ was one
of the most violent opponents of luxury. See _Pliny_, N. N.,
XXXIII, 1, 4, 13, and other places. The controversy has been
renewed by the moderns, especially since the beginning of
the 18th century, after luxury of every kind had previously
(for the most part on theological grounds, but also by
Hutten, for instance) been one-sidedly condemned. Among its
defenders were _Mandeville_, The Fable of the Bees, 1706,
who, however, calls everything a luxury which exceeds the
baldest necessities of life; _Voltaire_ in Le Mondain, the
Apologie du Luxe, and Sur L'Usage de la Vie; _Mélon_, Essai
politique sur le Commerce, ch. 9; _Hume_, Discourses, No. 2,
On Refinement in the Arts; _Dumont_, Théorie du Luxe, 1771;
_Filangieri_, Delle Leggi politiche ed economiche, II, 37;
and the majority of the Mercantile school and of the
Physiocrates. Among the opponents of luxury, _J. J.
Rousseau_ towers over almost all others. Further, _Fénélon_,
Télémaque, 1699, L. XXII; _Pinto_, Essai sur le Luxe, 1762.
The reasons and counter-reasons advanced by those writers
apply not only to luxury but to the lights and shades of
high civilization in general. When a political economist
declares for or against luxury in general, he resembles a
doctor who should declare for or against the nerves in
general. There has been luxury in every country and in every
age. Among a healthy people, luxury is also healthy, an
essential element in the general health of the nation. Among
an unhealthy people luxury is a disease, and
disease-engendering.
For an impartial examination of the question, see
_Ferguson_, History of Civil Society, towards the end; see
also _Beckmann_, in _Justis'_ Grundsätzen der Polizei, 1782,
§ 308; _Rau_, Ueber den Luxus, 1817; _Roscher_, Ueber den
Luxus, in the Archiv der Politischen Oekonomie, 1843, and in
his Ansichten der Volkswirthschaft, 1861, 399 ff.]
SECTION CCXXV.
THE HISTORY OF LUXURY.--IN THE MIDDLE AGES.
During the middle ages, industry and commerce had made as yet but little
progress. Hence it was as difficult then for luxury to be ministered to
by fine furniture as by the products of foreign countries. Individual
ornamental pieces, especially arms and drinking cups,[225-1] were wont
to be the only articles of luxury. We have inventories of the domains of
Charlemagne from which we find that in one of them, the only articles of
linen owned were two bed-sheets, a table-cloth and a pocket
handkerchief.[225-2] Fashion is here very constant; because clothing was
comparatively dearer than at present. And so now in the East. In the
matter of dwellings, too, more regard was had to size and durability,
than to elegance and convenience. The palaces of Alfred the Great were
so frailly built that the walls had to be covered with curtains as a
protection against the wind, and the lights to be inclosed in
lanterns.[225-3]
Hence the disposition to use the products of the home soil as articles
of luxury was all the greater, but more as to quantity than to
quality.[225-4] Since the knight could personally neither eat nor drink
a quantity beyond the capacity of his own stomach, he kept a numerous
suite to consume his surplus. It is well known what a great part was
played among the ancient Germans by their retinues of devoted servants
(_comitatus_), which many modern writers have looked upon as
constituting the real kernel of the migration of nations.
In England, it was a maxim of state policy with Henry VII., whose reign
there terminated the middle age, to prohibit the great liveried suites
of the nobility (19 Henry VII., ch. 14) as Richard II., Henry IV. and
Edward IV. had already attempted to do. But even under James I., we find
ambassadors accompanied by a suite of 500 persons or 300
noblemen.[225-5]
The rich man welcomed every opportunity which enabled him to make others
share in a dazzling manner the magnitude of his superfluous wealth:
hence the numberless guests at weddings who were frequently entertained
for weeks.[225-6] These festivities are memorable not because of the
delicacies or great variety of the dishes, but because of their colossal
magnitude. Even William of Orange, 1561, entertained at his wedding
guests who had brought with them 5,647 horses; and he appeared himself
with a suite of 1,100 men on horseback. There were consumed on the
occasion 4,000 bushels of wheat, 8,000 of rye, 11,300 of oats, 3,600
_eimers_ of wine, 1,600 barrels of beer.[225-7] In the ordinance of
Münden regulating weddings, promulgated in the year 1610, it is
provided, that, at a large wedding there should not be over 24 tables,
nor at a small one over 14, with 10 persons at each table.[225-8]
The hospitality of the lower stages of civilization[225-9] must be
ascribed as well to this peculiar kind of luxury as to mere good nature.
Arabian chiefs have their noon-day table set in the street and welcome
every passer-by to it.[225-10] (_Pococke._) And so, distinguished
Indians keep an open cauldron on the fire cooking all the time, from
which every person who comes in may help himself. (_Catlin._)
Compared with this luxury of the rich, the poverty found side by side
with it appears less oppressive. There is no great gap between the modes
of life of the different classes.[225-11] This is the golden age of
aristocracy, when no one questions its legitimateness. When, later, the
nobleman, instead of keeping so many servants, begins to buy costly
garments for himself, he, indeed, supports indirectly just as many and
even more men; but these owe him nothing. Besides, in this last kind of
luxury, it is very easily possible for him to go beyond his means, which
is scarcely ever the case in the former.[225-12]
[Footnote 225-1: Here, as a rule, the value of the metal was
greater than the form-value; and hence the medieval
monasteries frequently made loans of silver vessels, where
of course, the form could not be taken into consideration.
On the other hand, in the case of the table service,
presented by the king of Portugal to Lord Wellington, the
metal cost £85,000 and the workmanship £86,000. (_Jacob_,
Gesch. der edlen Metalle, translated by Kleinschrod, II, 5.)
Compare _Hume_, History of England, ch. 44, App. 3.
Similarly under Louis XIV. (_Sismondi_, Hist. des Français,
XXVII, 45.) When Rome was highly civilized, C. Gracchus paid
for very good silver ware, 15 times the value of the metal,
and L. Crassus, (consul 95 before Christ) 18 times its
value. _Mommsen_, R. Gesch. II, 383.]
[Footnote 225-2: _Specimen breviarii fiscalium Caroli
Magni_; compare _Anton_, Gesch. der deutschen Landwirthsch.
244 ff.]
[Footnote 225-3: _Turner_, History of the Anglo Saxons, VII,
ch. 6.]
[Footnote 225-4: In _Homer_, the kings live on nothing but
meat, bread and wine: compare _Athen._, I, 8. In the
saga-poetry of Iceland, _H. Leo_ does not remember to have
heard any other food mentioned except oat-pap, milk, butter
and cheese, fish, the flesh of domestic animals, and beer.
(_Raumer's_ Taschenbuch, 1835, 491)]
[Footnote 225-5: _Hume_, History of England, ch. 49, Append.
Similarly among all nations which have still preserved much
of the medieval. Thus the duke of Alba, about the end of the
last century, had not a single commodious hall in his
immense palace, but 400 rooms for his servants, since at
least all his old servants, and even their widows and
families, continued to live with him. In Madrid alone, he
paid £1,000 a month wages to his servants; and the son of
the duke, Medina-Celi, £4,000 per annum. (_Townsend_, II,
155, 158.) In many palaces in Moscow, previous to 1812,
there were 1,000 and more servants, unskillful, clad for the
most part as peasants, badly fed, and with so little to do
that perhaps one had no service to perform but to fetch
drinking water at noon, and another in the evening. Even
poor noblemen kept 20 and 30 servants, (_v. Haxthausen_,
Studien, I, 59.) _Forster_, Werke, VII, 347, explains Polish
luxury in servants, by the poorness of the servants there: a
good German maid could do more than three Polish servants.
Thus, in Jamaica, it was customary to exempt from the
slave-tax persons who kept fewer than 7 negroes. (_B.
Edwards_, History of the W. Indies, I, 229.) Compare _Livy_,
XXXIX, 11. The luxury of using torch-bearers instead of
candelabra lasted until Louis XIV.'s time. (_Rocquefort_,
Hist. de la Vie privée des Français, III, 171.) Compare _W.
Scott_, Legend of Montrose, ch. 4.]
[Footnote 225-6: A Hungarian magnate, under king Sigismund,
celebrated his son's wedding for a whole year. (_Fessler_,
Gesch. von Ungarn, IV, 1267.)]
[Footnote 225-7: _Müller_, Annal. Saxon, 68. Several
examples in _Sckweinichen's_ Leben von Büsching, I, 320 seq.
_Krünitz_, Enclycopædie, Bd. 82, 84 ff. The wedding of the
niece of Ottakar II. in 1264, has long been considered a
most brilliant event in the history of medieval luxury.
(_Palacky_, Gesch. von Böhmen, II, 191 ff.) Even yet, in
Abyssinia, on the occasion of royal feasts, only meat and
bread are eaten and mead drunk; but not only the great, but
even common soldiers are entertained one after the other.
(Ausland, 1846, No. 79.) Magnificent as was the table of a
West Indian planter, it was in some respects very simple. A
large ox was slaughtered for the feast, and everything had
to be prepared from that: roast beef, beef steaks, beef
pies, stews, etc. (_Pinckard_, Notes on the W. Indies, II.
100 ff.)]
[Footnote 225-8: _Spittler_, Geschichte Hanovers, I, 381.]
[Footnote 225-9: _Tacitus_, Germ., 21 Leg., says of the
Germans: _Convictibus et hospitiis non alia gens effusius
indulget. Quemcunque mortalium arcere tecto, nefas habetur.
Diem noctemque continuare potando, nulli probrum._]
[Footnote 225-10: Entirely the same among the ancient
Romans: _Valer. Max._, II, 5. Compare per _contra_,
_Euripid._, Herc. fur., 304 seq.]
[Footnote 225-11: Think of nomadic races especially, where
the rich can employ their wealth only to increase the number
of their partisans, for war purposes, etc.]
[Footnote 225-12: _Ferguson_, Hist. of Civil Society, VI, 3;
_Adam Smith_, Wealth of Nat., IV, ch. 4. Compare _Contzen_,
Politicorum, 1629, 662. As to how in the lower stages of
civilization, guests are used to supply the place of the
post-office service, see _Humboldt_, Relation hist., II,
61.]
SECTION CCXXVI.
LUXURY IN BARBAROUS TIMES.
The luxury of that uncivilized age shows itself for the most part on
particular occasions, and then all the more ostentatious, while in the
periods following it, it rather permeates the whole of life. Even J.
Möser excuses our forefathers for their mad celebration of their
_kirmesses_ and carnivals: _dulce est desipere in loco_, as Horace says,
and that they sometimes carried it to the extent of drowning
reason.[226-1] Among ourselves, the common man drinks brandy every day;
in Russia, seldom, but then, to the greatest excess.[226-2] The well
known peculiarity of feudal castles, that, besides one enormous hall,
they were wont to have very small and inconvenient rooms for every day
life, is accounted for in part by the great importance to them of festal
occasions, and in part by the cordiality of the life led in them, in
which lord and servants constituted one family. Nothing can be more
erroneous than to ascribe great temperance in general to people in a low
stage of civilization. Their simplicity is a consequence of their
ignorance rather than of their self-control. When nomadic races have
once tasted the cup of more delicate enjoyment, it is wont to hurry them
to destruction.[226-3]
[Footnote 226-1: _Möser_, Patr. Ph. IV, 7. On the feast of
fools and the feast of asses of the middle ages, compare
_Dutillet_, Mémoire pour sevir à l'Histoire de la Fête des
Fous; _D. Sacchi_, Delle Feste popolari del medio Evo.
During the latter half of the 16th century, the first
Hannoverian minister received only 200 thalers salary and
pieces of clothing, while the wedding of a certain von
Saldern cost 5,600 thalers. (_Spittler_, Gesch. Hannovers,
I, 333.)]
[Footnote 226-2: _v. Haxthausen_, Studien, II, 450, 513.
Thus, in 1631, of those who had died suddenly, there were
957 who died of drunkenness. (_Bernouilli_, Populationistik,
303.) According to _v. Lengefeldt_, Russland im 19. Jahrh.,
42, the number is now 1,474 to 1,911 per annum. On Poland,
see _Klebs_, Landeskulturgesetzgebung in Posen, 78. When the
South American Indians begin to drink, they do not stop
until they fall down senseless. (_Ulloa_, Noticias
Americanas, ch. 17.) The old Romans considered all
barbarians to be drunkards. (_Plato_, De Legg., I, 638.) In
eating, also, uncivilized people are extremely irregular. A
Jackute or Tunguse consumes 40 pounds of meat; three men
devour a whole reindeer at a meal. (_Cochrane_, Fussreise,
156.) One ate in 24 hours the back quarter of a large ox, or
1/2 a _pud_ of fat, and drank an equal quantity of melted
butter. (_Klemm_, Kulturgeschichte, III, 18.) Similarly
among hunting races. See _Klemm_, I, 243, 339; II, 13, 255.
On the South Sea Islanders, see _Hawkesworth_, III, 505;
_Forster_, I, 255.]
[Footnote 226-3: Rapid degeneration of almost all barbaric
dynasties as soon as they have subjugated civilized
countries.]
SECTION CCXXVII.
INFLUENCE OF THE CHURCH AND OF THE CITY.
The change in this situation takes place first of all in the churches
and in the cities. The Church has passed through almost every stage of
development in advance of the State; and civilization, both in the good
and bad sense of the term, has become general, and gradually acclimated
in the rural districts, through the influence of the cities. In the
Church, the earliest art endeavored to reach the beautiful. There, we
first find music, painting, sculpture, foreign perfumes, incense and
variegated garments.[227-1] In the cities, growing industry introduces a
more attractive style of clothing and a more ornamental style of
household furniture. Commerce, beginning to thrive, raises foreign
commodities into wants,[227-2] and thus the old luxury of feudal times
is modified.[227-3] The large number of idle servants is diminished. All
the more refined pleasures are extended downward to wider circles of the
people. Instead of individual bards, rhapsodists, skalds and
minnesingers, we have the beginnings of the theater, and instead of
tournaments, the shooting matches. (_Freischiessen._)
But it is remarkable how much earlier here pomp and splendor are
considered than convenience. The Spanish _romanceros_ of the 12th
century display wonderful splendor in their descriptions of the Cid, and
the trousseau of his daughters. But, on the other hand, the wife of
Charles VII. seems to have been the only French woman in the 15th
century who had more than two linen chemises. Even in the 16th century,
it frequently happened that a princess made a present to a prince of a
single shirt. At this time the German middle class were wont to sleep
naked.[227-4]
Even now, half-civilized nations look more to the outward appearance of
commodities than to their intrinsic value. Thus, for instance, in
Russia, we find large numbers of porcelain services extravagantly
painted and gilded, awkward, the material of which is full of blisters;
damaskeened knives, gilt sad-irons and candle-snuffers with landscapes
engraved on them: but nothing fits into anything else; the angles are
vicious, the hinges lame, and the whole soon goes to pieces. And so,
among export merchants in Bremen, for instance, it is a rule, on all
their wares intended for America, to put a label made of very beautiful
paper, with their coat-of-arms or firm-name in real silver, and to do
the packing in as elegant a manner as possible.[227-5] Cloths intended
for America are usually exceedingly light, destitute of solidity, but
very well dressed. The cotton-printers who work for the African market
prefer to employ false but cheap and dazzling colors.[227-6]
[Footnote 227-1: The use of window-glass in churches in
England dates from 674, in private houses from 1180.
(_Anderson_, Origin of Commerce, s. a.) Even in 1567, it was
so rare that during the absence of the lords from their
country seats, the panes were taken out and stored for safe
keeping. (_Eden_, State of the Poor, I, 77.) As to how
Scotland developed in this respect still later, see
_Buckle_, History of Civilization in England, II, 172.]
[Footnote 227-2: In our day, at the breakfast of a German of
the middle class, may be found East Indian coffee, Chinese
tea, West Indian sugar, English cheese, Spanish wine, and
Russian caviar, without any surprising degree of luxury.
Compare _Gellius_, N. A., VII, 16.]
[Footnote 227-3: In England, the transition is noticeable,
especially under Elizabeth: _Hume_ History, ch. 44, app. 3.
In France, under Louis XIV.; _Voltaire_, Siècle de Louis,
XIV., ch. 29.]
[Footnote 227-4: Poesias Castellanas anteriores al Siglo XV;
Tom. I, 347, 327. _Roscher_, loc. cit. _J. Voight_, in
_Raumer's_ historischem Taschenbuche, 1831, 290; 1835, 324,
seq. Thus, one of Henry VIII's wives, in order to get salad,
had first to send for a gardener from Flanders; while at the
time, a single ship imported into England from 3,000 to
4,000 pieces of clothing in gold brocade, satin or silk.
(_Anderson_, a. 1509, 1524, 4; Henry VIII, c. 6.)]
[Footnote 227-5: Irish linen, worth from 30 to 35 shillings,
is often provided with a label which cost 5 shillings.
(_Kotelmann_, Statistische Uebersicht der landwirthschaftl.
und industriellen Verhältnisse von Oestereich und dem
Zollverein, 215.)]
[Footnote 227-6: Compare _Kohl_, Reise in Deutschland, II,
18, 250. _Roscher_, in the Göttinger Studien, 1845, II, 403,
ff. About 1777, _Büsch_ described the difference of goods
manufactured in England "for the continent and home
consumption," as being just the same as the difference now
between goods for Africa and goods for Europe. (Darstellung
der Handlung, Zusatz, 89.)]
SECTION CCXXVIII.
HISTORY OF LUXURY IN HIGHLY CIVILIZED TIMES.
The direction which luxury takes in times when civilization is advanced,
is towards the real, healthy and tasteful enjoyment of life, rather than
an inconvenient display. This tendency is exceedingly well expressed by
the English word _comfort_, and it is in modern England that the luxury
of the second period has found it happiest development. It is found side
by side with frugality; and it frequently even looks like a return to
the unaffected love of nature.[228-1]
Thus, since Rousseau's time,[228-2] the so-called English gardens have
dropped the former Versailles-Harlem style. Thus, too, modern fashion
despises the awkward long wig, powdering etc.[228-3] Instead of garments
embroidered, or faced with fur or lace, and instead of the galloon hat
worn under Louis XIV. and Louis XV., the French revolution has
introduced the simple citizen frock-coat and the round silk hat. The
"exquisite" may even with these outshine others by the form he selects,
the material he wears, or by frequent change, but much less strikingly
than before.[228-4] Since every one, in the purchase of household
furniture, etc., looks more to its use than to the honor of being sole
possessor of an article or having something in advance of everybody
else, it becomes possible for industry to manufacture its products in
much larger quantities, and after the same model, and thus to furnish a
much better article for the same price.[228-5] Besides, more recent
industry has produced a multitude of cheap substitutes for costly
objects of luxury: plated silver-leafing, cotton-velvet goods,
etc.;[228-6] besides the many steel engravings, lithographs etc., which
have exerted so beneficent an influence on æsthetic education.
In the England of our days, the houses are comparatively small, but
convenient and attractive, and the salutary luxury of spending the
pleasant season in the country very general.[228-7] The country-roads
are narrow but kept in excellent order and provided with good
inns.[228-8] More value is here attached to fine linen cloth than to
lace;[228-9] to a few but nourishing meat-dishes than to any number of
sauces and confections of continental kitchens.[228-10] Especially is
the luxury of cleanliness, with its morally and intellectually
beneficial results found only in well-to-do and highly cultured nations.
As formerly in Holland, so now in England, it is carried to the highest
point of development. In the latter country, the tax on soap is
considered a tax on an indispensable article.[228-11] The reverse is the
case in North America, if we can believe the most unprejudiced and
friendly observers.[228-12] The person who lives in a log-house must, to
feel at ease within his four walls, first satisfy a number of necessary
wants.[228-13]
[Footnote 228-1: The reformation of the sixteenth century
had a remarkable tendency towards natural and manful
fashions, as contradistinguished from the immediately
preceding and the immediately following periods. Compare _J.
Falke_, Deutsche Trachten und Modenwelt, II, 1858.]
[Footnote 228-2: _J. J. Rousseau_, N. Héloise, II, L. 11.
Compare _Keysler_, Reise, I, 695.]
[Footnote 228-3: That a similar transition marked an epoch
in the history of Grecian morals was recognized even by
_Thucydides_, I, 6; compare _Asios_, in _Athen._, XII, 528.]
[Footnote 228-4: It will always remain a want to own clothes
for every day wear and festal occasions. The frock coat
satisfies this want in the cheapest way. As soon as people
cease to distinguish clothing for festal occasions by the
cut, gold-embroidery, fur-facing, etc. will appear again,
which would necessarily prove a great hardship to the
propertyless classes of the educated, and even to the higher
classes.]
[Footnote 228-5: On the striking contrast presented in this
respect by the English and French, and even Russian customs,
see _Storch_, Handbuch, II, 179 ff. _J. B. Say_, Cours
pratique, translated into German by _Morstadt_, I, 435 ff.;
Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift, 1853, I, 182.]
[Footnote 228-6: Paper-hangings, instead of costly gobelins
and leather hangings, were not known in France until after
1760, nor in the rest of Europe until much later. Busts of
plaster were (_Martial_, IX, 17, and _Juvenal_, II, 4) usual
among those who were less well off.]
[Footnote 228-7: Similarly even in _Giov. Villani_, XI, 93,
the villas of the highly cultured Florentines appear finer
than their city houses, while in Germany, at that time, even
the richest citizens lived only in the city.]
[Footnote 228-8: Sidewalks in the cities, recommended by _J.
J. Rousseau_, as a popular convenience and as a safeguard
against the carriage-aristocracy.]
[Footnote 228-9: In France, the luxury of lace was conquered
by Marie Antoinette, but still more effectually by the
Revolution. Previous to that time, many Parisians wore four
manchettes to each shirt. (_Palliser_, History of Lace,
1865.)]
[Footnote 228-10: During the middle ages, strongly seasoned
food, ragouts, etc., were more in favor than in even France
to-day; compare _Legrand d'Aussy et Roquefort_, Histoire de
la Vie priveé des Français, passim. The wine even, at that
time, used to be mixed with roots: _vin de romarin_,
_clairet_, _hippocras_, (_W. Wackernagel_, Kl. Schriften I,
86, 7.) The French kitchen became simpler and more natural,
only after the middle of the 18th century. (_Roquefort_,
III, 343.)]
[Footnote 228-11: The taxed consumption of soap amounted in
England in 1801 to 4.84 and in 1845, 9.65 pounds per capita.
(_Porter_, Progress of the Nation, V, 5, 579.) Soap-boiling
in London dates from 1520 only. Before that time, all white
soap was obtained from the continent. (_Howell_,
Londinopolis, 208.) _Erasmus_ charged that England, in his
time, was an exceedingly dirty country. The Italians, on the
other hand, were at that time greatly distinguished above
northern people, especially the Germans, by their
cleanliness. (_Buckhardt_, Kultur der Renaissance, 295.) The
Vienna river-baths after 1870, _Nicolai_, Reise, III, 17,
mentions as something deserving special note. The Leipzig
river-baths date from 1774.]
[Footnote 228-12: _Birkbeck_, Notes on America, 39. Even in
New York, it is not very long since there were no common
sewers. Just as characteristic is the uncleanliness of the
South African _boers_ (_Mauch_, in _Petermann's_
Mittheilungen, Ergänz-Heft, XXVII, 23), when compared with
the celebrated cleanliness of the old Dutch.
Americans will certainly not agree with the "friendly
and unprejudiced" observers mentioned in the text; for
no one acquainted with genuine American home-life can
deny that cleanliness is an American characteristic. It
is only justice to the author to say that the above
note (12), so far as it relates to America, appeared in
the second edition of his work, and probably in the
first; and that he is not so much to be blamed for it
as the unfriendly and prejudiced, if not ignorant
observers. It may be said, however, that, from the use
of the word "log-house," in the context, the author
does not intend to apply this remark to the older
settlements.--TRANSLATOR.]
[Footnote 228-13: The most frightful uncleanliness prevails
among the inhabitants of polar countries, who never bathe,
because of the climate, avoid all ventilation, and because
of the leathern clothing which they smear with grease, etc.
The Tunguses consider the after-birth cooked or roasted as a
great delicacy. "Fathers and mothers wipe their children's
noses with their mouth, and gulp the secretion down."
(_Georgi_, Beschreib. aller Nationen des russ. Reiches, I,
287.) Among the Koruks, the suitor rinses his mouth with his
sweetheart's water. (loc. cit., I, 349, 353.) Compare
_Klemm_, Kulturgeschichte, III, 24, 57. In warmer climates,
even less civilized nations are clean, for instance in the
East and South-Sea Islands, etc. All the more surprising is
the uncleanliness of the Hottentots and Bushmen, where the
natural color is observable only under the eyes, where the
tears produced by too much smoke has washed away the crust
of dirt which, with this exception, covers the whole body.
(_Klemm_, Kulturgeschichte, 333.) How long it takes for
cleanliness to become a national trait, may be inferred from
the history of water-closets, when, for instance, their
introduction into every house during the 16th and even the
17th century, had to be provided for by law in Paris.
(_Beckmann_, Beiträge, II, 358 ff.) The Göttingen statutes
of 1342 had to expressly prohibit persons to _merdare_ in
public wine-cellars where persons ate and drank together.
(_Spittler_, Gesch. Hannovers, I, 57.) Similarly in the
courts of the German princes. On the other hand,
universality of water-closets in England to-day.
In ancient times, too, the uncleanliness of the Spartans in
body and clothing was very surprising to the Athenians:
_Xenoph._, Resp. Laced., II, 4; _Plutarch_, Lycurg, 16.
_Just._, Lac., 5. Still more that of many barbarians, for
instance of the Illyrians: _Stobaeus_, V, 51, 132; _Gaisf.
Aelian._, V, H. IV, 1. The ancient Romans bathed only once a
week (_Seneca_, Epist., 86), while under the Empire, "the
baths embraced and filled up the whole life of man and all
his wishes." (_Gerlach._) Compare _Becker_, Gallus, II, 10
ff.; _Lamprid_, V, Comm., 11.]
SECTION CCXXIX.
EXTENT OF LUXURY IN HIGHLY CIVILIZED TIMES.
The luxury of this second period fills the whole of life and permeates
every class of people. Hence we may most easily determine the degree of
development a people have attained by the quantity of commodities of a
finer quality which are, indeed, not indispensable to life, but which it
is desirable should be consumed on as extensive a scale as possible by
the nation, for the sake of the fullness of life and the
freshness[229-1] of life to which they minister.
Thus, for instance, as civilization has advanced, there has been almost
everywhere a transition to a finer quality of the material of which
bread is made. The number of consumers of white bread in France in 1700,
was 33 per cent. of the population; in 1760, 40; in 1764, 39; in 1791,
37; in 1811, 42; in 1818, 45; in 1839, 60 per cent.[229-2] About 1758,
in England and Wales, 3,750,000 of people lived on wheat bread; on
barley bread, 739,000; on rye bread, 888,000; on oat bread, 623,000. The
cultured southeastern population had almost nothing but wheat bread,
while in the north and northwest, oat bread continued to be used a long
time; and in Wales only 10 per cent. of the population ate wheat bread.
This condition of things in England has since been much improved. But,
at the extremities of the Hebrides, nine-tenths of the population still
live on barley bread; and in Ireland it was estimated, in 1838, that
with 8,000,000 inhabitants, potatoes were the chief article of food of
5,000,000, and oat bread of 2,500,000.[229-3]
And so, the consumption of meat in cities is uniformly much larger than
in the country. In the cities of the Prussian monarchy and subject to
the slaughter-house tax, it amounted in 1846, per capita: in East
Prussia, to 61 lbs.; in Pommerania, to 66; in Posen, to 70; in West
Prussia, to 71; in Saxony, to 75; in the Rhine Province, to 83; in
Silesia, to 86; in Brandenburg, to nearly 104; in Berlin alone, to 114:
an average in the whole country, however, of scarcely 40 lbs. per
capita. (_Dietrici._) In the kingdom of Saxony, the average consumption
of beef and pork was, shortly before 1866, about 50 lbs.; in Dresden
alone, 86.7; in Leipzig, 136.9 lbs.[229-4] The consumption of meat in
England is exceedingly great, so that, for instance, in several orphan
asylums in London, the daily meat ration amounts to an average of from
0.23 to 0.438 lbs. The meat-consumption of a well-to-do family, children
and servants included, Porter estimates at 370 lbs. per capita per
annum. The meat ration of soldiers in the field amounts in England to
676 grammes a day; in France, to 350.[229-5]
The consumption of sugar in 1734, in England, was about 10 lbs. per
capita; in 1845, in the whole of the British Empire, 20-1/3 lbs.; in
1849, almost 25 lbs.; in 1865, over 34 lbs.; but it must not be
overlooked here, that in Ireland the consumption of sugar per capita was
scarcely over 8 lbs.[229-6] In the German Zollverein, the consumption of
sugar, in 1834, amounted to an average of 2-1/2 lbs. per capita; in
1865, to more than 9 lbs. In France, the consumption of the same article
rose from 1.33 kilogrammes, the average from 1817 to 1821, to 7.35 lbs.
in 1865.[229-7] The population of the Zollverein rose 25.8 per cent.
between 1834 and 1847, while the importation of coffee increased 117.5
per cent.; of spices, 58.2; southern fruits, 34.5, and cocoa, 246.2 per
cent.[229-8]
A great many of vegetables and fruits, which seem to us to be almost
indispensable articles of subsistence, have been cultivated only a short
time. Thus the English have been acquainted with artichokes, asparagus,
several kinds of beans, salad, etc. only since 1660.[229-9] Even in
France, the finer kinds of fruits have appeared on the tables of the
middle class only since the beginning of the last century.
The per capita consumption of wool in England, about a generation ago,
amounted to about 4 lbs. a year; in Prussia to 1.67; of cloth, to 5.76
and 2.17 ells; of leather, to 3.03 and 2.22 lbs. respectively.[229-10]
Of silk goods, England consumes half as much as the rest of all Europe,
and an Englishman from 5 to 6 times as much as a Frenchman, although
England does not produce a single pound of raw silk.[229-11]
[Footnote 229-1: Thus, for instance, the modern enjoyments
of coffee, tea, newspapers, tobacco etc., promote
domesticity with which antiquity was so little acquainted.
_Zaccharia_, Vierzig Bücher, VI, 60.]
[Footnote 229-2: The food of the French people has improved
also in point of quantity. At the beginning of the
eighteenth century, of cereals there were 472 liters per
capita, at present there are 541 liters; and in addition,
now, 240 liters of potatoes and vegetables more than then.
Compare _Moreau de Joannès_, Statistique de l'Agriculture de
la France, 1848, and the same writer's Statistique céréale
de la France, in the Journal des Economistes, 1842, Janv. On
the recent decrease or increase in the consumption of meat,
see the very different estimates of _M. Chevalier_, Cours.,
I, 113 seq., and Journal des Economistes, Mars, 1856, 438
ff.]
[Footnote 229-3: _Ch. Smith_, Tracts on the Corn Trade,
1758, 182. _Eden_, State of the Poor, I, 563, seq. In
_McCulloch_, Statist, I, 316, 466 ff., 548. Moreover,
_Rogers_ says that English workmen in the middle ages, for
the most part, consumed wheat bread. (Statist. Journal,
1864, 73.) About the middle of the 13th century, only from
11 to 12 _malters_ of wheat were produced on the estates of
the bishop of Osnabrück; about 470 of oats, 300 of rye, and
120 of barley. (_J. Möser_, Osnabrück, Gesch., Werke, VII,
2. 166.) Even beer was brewed from oats in the earlier part
of the middle ages. (_Guérard_, Polyptiques, I, 710 ff.) The
ancients, also, in their lower stages of civilization, lived
on barley bread by way of preference, and went over to wheat
only at a later period; compare _Plin._, H. N. XVIII, 14.
_Heracl._, Pont, fr. 2. _Athen._, IV., 137, 141. _Plutarch_,
Alcib., 23. As to how, in Rome, the transition from _far_ to
the much more costly _triticum_, was connected with the
extension of the hide of land from 2 to 7 _jugera_, see _M.
Voigt_ in the Rhein. Museum f. Philol., 1868.]
[Footnote 229-4: To this, in Saxony, must be added about
from 6 to 7 pounds of veal and mutton. The recent increase
in the consumption of meat in Saxony is very encouraging:
1840, about 30 lbs. of beef and pork per capita; 1851-57, 40
lbs. (Sächs. Statist. Ztschr., 1867, 143 seq.) On the other
hand, _Schmoller_ estimated the consumption of meat in
general in Prussia, in 1802, at 33.8; in 1816, at 22.5; in
1840, at 34.6; in 1867, at 34.9 lbs. (_Fühling_, N. Landw.
Zeitg., XIX; Jahrg. Heft., 9 seq.) Paris consumed, in 1850,
145 pounds of butcher's meat per capita; in 1869, 194
pounds. In the year of the revolution, 1848, the consumption
declined 45 per cent.; the consumption of wine in barrels,
16 per cent.; in bottles, 44 per cent.; of sea-fish, 25 per
cent.; of oysters, 24 per cent.; of beer, 20 per cent.; of
eggs, 19 per cent.; of butter, 13 per cent.; of fowl, 6 per
cent. (_Cl. Juglar_, in the Journal des Economistes, March,
1870.)]
[Footnote 229-5: _Porter_, Progress of the Nation, V, 5, 591
ff.; _Hildesheim_, Normaldiet, 52 ff. Well-known English
popular song: "Oh, the roast beef of old England" etc. Even
at the end of the 17th century one-half of the nation
partook of fresh meat scarcely once or twice a week; most of
that consumed was salted. (_Macaulay_, History of England,
ch. 3.) But even _Boisguillebert_, Traité des Grains, II, 7,
characterizes the English as great beer-drinkers and
meat-eaters, from the highest class to the lowest, while the
French consumed almost nothing but bread. Similarly _J. J.
Becher_, Physiologie, 1678, 202, 248, on the great
consumption of meat and sugar in England.]
[Footnote 229-6: _Anderson_, Origin of Commerce, a. 1743;
_Porter_, Progress, V, 4, 350 ff.; Meidinger, 154 ff.;
Memorandum respecting British Commerce, etc., before and
since the Adoption of Free Trade, 1866. On men-of-war each
man gets 35-45 lbs. a year; in the poorhouse, old men
22-3/4. (_Porter._)]
[Footnote 229-7: In Henry IV.'s time, in France, sugar was
sold by the apothecaries by the ounce!]
[Footnote 229-8: _Deiterici_, Statist. Uebersicht des
Verkehrs, etc. im Zollvereine, 4; Fortsetzung, 168 ff., 208,
265, 599. Thus, in Great Britain, the population between
1816 and 1828 grew, from 13-1/2 million to nearly 16
million. On the other hand, consumption, when the average
from 1816 to 1819 is compared with that from 1824 to 1828,
increased in a much greater proportion: soap, from 67-3/4 to
100 million pounds; coffee, from 7,850,000 to 12,540,000
pounds; starch, from 3-1/5 to 6-1/3 million pounds. (Quart.
Rev., Nov., 1829, 518.) The consumption of tea per capita in
1801 was 1.5 lbs., in 1871, 3.93 lbs. (Statist. Journ.,
1872, 243.) In the matter of illumination, a very beneficent
luxury has been obtained, inasmuch as, spite of the fact
that gas-light is so generally used in recent times, i. e.,
since 1804, the consumption of oil has very much increased,
on account of the lamps now so much in favor; and that of
candles also has increased, relatively speaking, more
rapidly than the population. The illumination produced is
much richer now than formerly, a fact which, besides its
sanitary advantages, has had a good influence in diminishing
street robberies. (_Julius_, Gefängnisskunde, XXII.) During
the middle ages, candles were very dear; according to
_Rogers_ (I, 415) 1-1/3 to 2 shillings per pound.]
[Footnote 229-9: Present state of England, 1683, III, 529;
compare _Storch_, Handbuch, II, 337 seq.]
[Footnote 229-10: _Dieterici_, Statist. Uebersicht, 321 ff.,
363, 399.]
[Footnote 229-11: _Bernouilli_, Technologie, II, 223. It is
a striking symptom of the wealth or ostentation of the later
period of the Empire that, according to _Ammian. Marcell_,
(XXIII, 258-ed. Paris, 1636) silk goods were a want even
among the lower classes, notwithstanding the fact that they
had to be imported from China.]
SECTION CCXXX.
EQUALIZING TENDENCY OF LATER LUXURY.
The whole social character of this luxury has something
equalizing[230-1] in it; but it supposes particularly that there is not
too marked a difference in the resources of the people.
A proper gradation of national wants is best guarantied by a good
distribution of the national resources.[230-2] The more unequal the
latter is, the more is there spent on vain wants instead of on real
ones; and the more numerous are the instances of rapid and even immoral
consumption. Where there are only a few over-rich men, more foreign
products and products of capital are wont to be called for than home
products and productions of labor; and luxury especially despises all
those commodities manufactured in large institutions.[230-3] Every
change in the consumption-customs of a people, in this respect, should
be most carefully observed; thus, for instance, whether brandy is
exchanged for beer, tobacco for meat, cotton for cloth, or the
reverse.[230-4]
One of the characteristics of this period is the endeavor to possess the
best quality of whatever is possessed at all, and to be satisfied with
less of it rather than purchase more of an inferior quality. This is,
essentially, to practice frugality, inasmuch as certain
production-services remain the same whether the commodity is of the best
or the worst quality, and that commodities of the best quality are more
superior to the worst in intrinsic goodness than they are in price. But
this course supposes a certain well-being already existing.
In this period, also, the luxury of the state is wont to take the
direction of those enjoyments which are accessible to all.[230-5]
[Footnote 230-1: Formerly the dress of citizens was a weak
imitation of the court costume: at present the reverse is
the case, and the court costume is only a heightening of the
citizen costume. Compare _Riehl_, Bürgerl. Gesellschaft,
191.]
[Footnote 230-2: _Helvetius_, De l'Homme, 1771. sec. VI, ch.
5.]
[Footnote 230-3: _J. B. Say_, Traité, II, 4; _Sismondi_, N.
P., IV, ch. 4. As early a writer as _Lauderdale_, Inquiry,
358 ff., thought the social leveling of modern times would
promote English industry. In the East Indies, on the other
hand, only the most expensive watches, rifles, candelabras
etc. were sold, because the nabobs were the only persons who
created any demand for European commodities (312 ff.). _Adam
Smith_, Wealth of Nat., II, ch. 3, draws a very correct
distinction between the luxury of durable goods and that of
those which perish rapidly; the former is less calculated to
impoverish an individual or a whole nation; and hence it is
much more closely allied to frugality. Similarly even
_Isocrates_, ad Niccol., 19; _Livy_, XXIV, 7; _Plin._, H.
N., XIII, 4; _Mariana_, 1598, De Rege et Regis Institutione,
III, 10; _Sir W. Temple_, Works, I, 140 seq., who found this
better kind of luxury in Holland: _Berkeley_, Querist, No.
296 ff.]
[Footnote 230-4: _Schmoller_, loc. cit., considers it no
favorable symptom, that in Prussia, between 1802 and 1867,
the per capita consumption of milk decreased and that of
wool increased. According to _L. Levi_, the consumption of
brandy in England decreased from 1854 and 1870, from 1.13 to
1.01 gallons per capita; but, on the other hand, the
consumption of malt increased from 1.45 to 1.84 bushels, and
the consumption of wine from 0.23 to 0.45 gallons. The
number of licenses to retail spirituous liquors was, in
1830, 6.30 per thousand of the population; in 1860-69, only
5.57. (Statist. Journal, 1872, 32 ff.)]
[Footnote 230-5: Compare _Cicero_, pro Murena, 36. The
Athenians under Pericles, in times of peace, spent more than
one-third of their state-income on plastic and architectural
works of art. The annual state-income amounted to 1,000
talents (_Xenoph._, Exp. Cyri, VII, 1, 27), while the
propylea alone cost, within 5 years, 2,012 talents.
(_Böckh_, Staatsh., I, 283.) On the other hand,
_Demosthenes_ complains of the shabbiness of public
buildings, and the magnificence of private ones in his time.
(adv. Aristocr., 689, Syntax., 174 seq.)
_Demetrius Phalereus_ blames even Pericles, on account of
his extravagance on the propylea, although Lycurgus had
been, not long before, addicted to luxury after the manner
of Pericles. (_Cicero_, De Off., II, 17.)]
SECTION CCXXXI.
THE ADVANTAGES OF LUXURY.
The favorable results which many writers ascribe to luxury in general
are true evidently only of this period. And thus luxury, inasmuch as it
is a spur to emulation, promotes production in general; just as the
awarding of prizes in a school, although they can be carried away only
by a few, excites the activity of all its attendants. A nation which
begins to consume sugar will, as a rule, unless it surrenders some
previous enjoyment, increase its production.[231-1] In countries where
there is little or no legal security, in which, therefore, people must
keep shy of making public the good condition they are in, this
praise-worthy side of luxury is for the most part wanting.[231-2]
All rational luxury constitutes a species of reserve fund for a future
day of need. This is especially true of these luxuries which take the
form of capital in use (_Nutzkapitalien_.) Where it is customary for
every peasant girl to wear a gold head-dress,[231-3] and every
apprentice a medal, a penny for a rainy day is always laid by among the
lower classes. The luxury which is rapidly consumed has a tendency in
the same direction. Where the majority of the population live on
potatoes, as in Ireland, where, therefore, they are reduced to the
smallest allowance of the means of subsistence, there is no refuge in
case of a bad harvest. A people on the other hand, who live on wheat
bread may go over to rye bread, and a people who live on rye bread to
potatoes. The corn that in good years is consumed in the making of
brandy may, in bad years, be baked into bread.[231-4] And the oats
consumed by horses kept as luxuries may serve as food for man.
Pleasure-gardens (_Lustgärten_) may be considered as a kind of last
resort for a whole people in case of want of land.[231-5] [231-6]
[Footnote 231-1: Compare _Benjamin Franklin's_ charming
story, Works I, 134 ff.; ed. Robinson. _Colbert_ recommended
luxury chiefly on account of its service to production.]
[Footnote 231-2: Turkish magnates who keep several
magnificent equipages ride to the sultan's in a very bad
one. Risa Pascha, when at the height of his power, had his
house near a villa of the sultan painted in the plainest and
most unsightly manner possible. The walls of a park in
Constantinople painted half in red and half in blue, to give
it the appearance of being two _gardens_. (Alg. Zeitung, 16
Juli, 1849.) In Saxony, between 1847 and 1850, the number of
luxury horses diminished from 6.11 to 5.64 per cent. of the
total number of horses in the kingdom. (_Engel_, Jahrbuch,
I, 305.) In the same country there were coined in 1848 over
64,000 silver marks, derived from other sources than the
mines. (_Engel_, Statis. Zeitschr. I, 85.) In England, on
the other hand, the number of four-wheeled carriages
increased more than 60 per cent. between 1821 and 1841,
while the population increased only 30 per cent. (_Porter_,
Progress, V, 3, 540.)]
[Footnote 231-3: Such a head-dress may very easily be worth
300 guldens in Friesland. Gold crosses worn by the peasant
women about Paris. (_Turgot_, Lettre sur la Liberté du
Commerce des Grains.)]
[Footnote 231-4: So far it is of some significance, that
nearly all not uncivilized nations use their principal
article of food to prepare drinks that are luxuries. Thus,
the Indians use rice, the Mexicans mais, the Africans the
ignam-root. It is said that in ancient Egypt, beer-brewing
was introduced by Osiris. (_Diodor._, I, 34.) Compare
_Jeremy Bentham_, Traité de Législation, I, 160. _Malthus_,
Principle of Population, I, ch. 12; IV, ch. 11.]
[Footnote 231-5: While in thinly populated North America,
space permits the beautiful luxury in cemeteries of
ornamenting surroundings of each grave separately (_Gr.
Görtz_, Reise, 24), the Chinese garden-style seeks to effect
a saving in every respect. In keeping with this is the fact
that animal food has there been almost abolished. Compare,
besides, _Verri_, Meditazioni, XXVI, 3.]
[Footnote 231-6: _Garve_ thinks that luxury, when it takes
the direction of a great many trifles, little conveniences,
etc., has the effect of distracting the people. Here there
are few men of towering ambition or of inextinguishable
revenge, but at the same time, few entirely unselfish and
incorruptible patriots. (_Versuche_, I, 232.)]
SECTION CCXXXII.
LUXURY IN DECLINING NATIONS.
In declining nations, luxury assumes an imprudent and immoral character.
Enormous sums are expended for insignificant enjoyments. It may even be
said that costly consumption is carried on there for its own sake. The
beautiful and the true enjoyment of life makes place for the monstrous
and the effeminate.
Rome, in the earlier part of the empire, affords us an example of such
luxury on the most extensive scale.[232-1] Nero paid three hundred
talents for a murrhine vase. The two acres (_Morgen_) of land which
sufficed to the ancient citizens for a farm (_Acker_) were not now
enough to make a fish-pond for imperial slaves. The sums carried by the
exiles with them, to cover their traveling expenses and to live on for a
time, were now greater than the fortunes of the most distinguished
citizens had been in former times.[232-2] There was such a struggle
among the people to surpass one another in procuring the freshest
sea-fish that, at last, they would taste only such as they had seen
alive on the table. We have the most exalted descriptions of the
beautiful changes of color undergone by the dying fish; and a special
infusion was invented to enable the epicure better to enjoy the
spectacle.[232-3] Of the transparent garments of his time, Seneca says
that they neither protected the body nor covered the nakedness of
nature. People kept herds of sheep dyed in purple, although their
natural white must have been much more agreeable to any one with an eye
for the tasteful.[232-4] Not only on the roofs of houses were fish-ponds
to be seen, but gardens even hanging on towers, and which must have been
as small, ugly and inconvenient as they were costly.[232-5] Especially
characteristic of the time was the custom of dissolving pearls in wine,
not to make it more palatable, but more expensive.[232-6] The emperor
Caligula, from simple caprice, caused mountains to be built up and cut
away: _nihil tam efficere concupiscebat, quam, quod posse effici
negaretur_.[232-7] This is the real maxim of the third period of luxury!
People changed their dress at table, inconvenient as it was to do so,
occasionally as often as eleven times. Perfumes were mixed with the wine
that was drunk, much as it spoiled its taste, only that the drinkers
might emit sweet odors from every pore. There were many so used to being
waited on by slaves that they required to be reminded by them at what
times they should eat and when they should sleep. It is related of one
who affected superiority over others in this respect, that he was
carried from his bath and placed on a cushion, when he asked his
attendant: "Am I sitting down now?"[232-8] It is no wonder, indeed, that
an Apicius should reach out for the poisoned cup when his fortune had
dwindled to only _centies sestertium_, _i. e._, to more than half a
million thalers.[232-9]
In this last period, the coarse debauchery of the earlier periods is
added to the refined. Swarms of servants, retinues of gladiators who
might be even politically dangerous,[232-10] monster banquets, at which
Cæsar, for instance, entertained the whole Roman people, colossal
palaces such as Nero's _aurea domus_, which constituted a real city;
annoying ostentation in dress[232-11] again becomes the order of the
day. The more despotic a state becomes, the more is the craving for
momentary enjoyment wont to grow; and for the same reason that great
plagues diminish frugality and morality.[232-12]
[Footnote 232-1: _Meierotto_, Sitten und Lebensart des
Römer, II, 1776; _Boettiger_, Sabina, II, 1803;
_Friedländer_, Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Roms,
Bd. III, 1868; which latter work has been written with the
aid of all that modern science can afford.]
[Footnote 232-2: _Plin._, H. N., XXXVII, 7; XVIII, 2;
_Seneca_, Quaest. Natur., I, 17; Consol. ad. Helviam, 12.]