------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcriber’s Note:
This version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects.
Italics are delimited with the ‘_’ character as _italic_.
Footnotes have been moved to follow the paragraphs in which they are
referenced.
The table of contents includes references in Book III to sections
printed in the text as marginal notes (sidenotes). Each has been linked
for ease of reference.
[Sidenote: Marginal Notes.]
All marginal notes will appear prior to the paragraph they annotated as,
prefixed with ‘Sidenote:’
There was an Errata included in the text. The corrections listed there
were made.
Minor errors, attributable to the printer, have been corrected. Please
see the transcriber’s note at the end of this text for details regarding
the handling of any textual issues encountered during its preparation.
AN
INQUIRY
INTO THE
PRINCIPLES OF POLITICAL OECONOMY:
BEING AN
ESSAY ON THE SCIENCE
OF
Domestic Policy in Free Nations.
IN WHICH ARE PARTICULARLY CONSIDERED
POPULATION, AGRICULTURE, TRADE, INDUSTRY,
MONEY, COIN, INTEREST, CIRCULATION, BANKS,
EXCHANGE, PUBLIC CREDIT, AND TAXES.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Sir JAMES STEUART, Bart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_Ore trahit quodcumque potest atque addit acervo._ HOR. Lib. I. Sat. 1.
IN TWO VOLUMES.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOL. I.
LONDON:
Printed for A. MILLAR, and T. CADELL, in the Strand.
MDCCLXVII.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_PREFACE._
It is with the greatest diffidence that I present to the public this
attempt towards reducing to principles, and forming into a regular
science, the complicated interests of domestic policy. When I consider
the time and labour employed in the composition, I am apt to value it
from selfish considerations. When I compare it even with my own
abilities, I still think favourably of it, for a better reason; because
it contains a summary of the most valuable part of all my knowledge. But
when I consider the greatness of my subject, how small does the result
of my application appear!
The imperfections, therefore, discovered in this work, will, I hope, be
ascribed to the disproportion between the extent of the undertaking, and
that of my capacity. This has been exerted to the utmost: and if I have
failed, it may, at least, with justice, be said, that I have miscarried
in an attempt of the greatest importance to mankind.
I no where shew the least desire to make my court to any particular
statesman whose administration might have been hinted at. I freely
follow the thread of my reasoning without a biass, either in favour of
popular opinions, or of any of the numberless systems which have been
formed by those who have written upon particular parts of my subject.
The warmth of my temper has led me often into commendations, when I was
pleased; but when I felt the effects of ill humour on being dissatisfied
with particular circumstances, relating to countries, to men, and to
things, which I had in view at the time I was writing, I seldom thought
it proper to be particular. I have, in general, considered the danger of
error, either in blaming or commending the steps of any administration,
without being well informed of the whole combination of circumstances
which the statesman had before him at the time.
This composition being the successive labour of many years spent in
travelling, the reader will find some passages in which the unities of
time and place have not been observed. These I could have corrected with
ease, had I not been advised to leave them as characters to point out
the circumstances under which I wrote, and thereby to confirm the
authenticity of certain facts.
The modes of thinking, also, peculiar to the several countries where I
have lived, have, no doubt, had an influence on what I have writ
concerning their customs: the work, therefore, will not, in general,
correspond to the meridian of national opinions any where; and of this
it is proper the reader should be apprised, that he may not apply to the
domestic circumstances of his own country what was intended to refer to
those of other nations; nor impute what was the irresistible effect of
my experience and conviction, to wilful prejudice.
I have read many authors on the subject of political oeconomy; and I
have endeavoured to draw from them all the instruction I could. I have
travelled, for many years, through different countries, and have
examined them, constantly, with an eye to my own subject. I have
attempted to draw information from every one with whom I have been
acquainted: this, however, I found to be very difficult before I had
attained to some previous knowledge of my subject. Such difficulties
confirmed to me the justness of Lord Bacon’s remark, that he who knows
how to draw information by forming proper questions, is already
possessed of half the science[A].
Footnote A:
_Prudens interrogatio, dimidium scientiæ._
I could form no consistent plan from the various opinions I met with:
hence I was engaged to compile the observations I had casually made, in
the course of my travels, reading, and experience. From these I formed
the following work, after expunging the numberless inconsistencies and
contradictions which I found had arisen from my separate inquiries into
every particular branch.
I had observed so many persons declining in knowledge as they advanced
in years, that I resolved early to throw upon paper whatever I had
learned; and to this I used to have recourse, as others have to their
memories. The unity of the object of all my speculations, rendred this
practice more useful to me than it would be to one whose researches are
more extended.
Whoever is much accustomed to write for his own use merely, must
contract a more careless stile than another who has made language his
study, and who writes in hopes of acquiring a literary reputation. I
never, till very lately, thought of appearing as an author; and in the
frequent perusals of what I had writ, my corrections were chiefly in
favour of perspicuity: add to this, that the language in which I now
write was, for many years, foreign to those with whom I lived and
conversed. When these circumstances are combined with the intricacy of
my subject, which constantly carried off my attention from every
ornament of language, I flatter myself that those of my readers, at
least, who enter as heartily as I have done into the spirit of this
work, will candidly overlook the want of that elegance which adorns the
stile of some celebrated authors in this Augustan age. I present this
inquiry to the public as nothing more than an essay which may serve as a
canvass for better hands than mine to work upon.
It contains such observations only as the general view of the domestic
policy of the countries I have seen, has suggested. It is a speculation,
and no more. It is a rough drawing of a mighty plan, proportioned in
correctness to my own sagacity, to my knowledge of the subject and to
the extent of my combinations.
It goes little farther than to collect and arrange some elements upon
the most interesting branches of modern policy, such as _population,
agriculture, trade, industry, money, coin, interest, circulation, banks,
exchange, public credit, and taxes_. The principles deduced from all
these topics, appear tolerably consistent; and the whole is a train of
reasoning, through which I have adhered to the connection of subjects as
faithfully as I could: but the nature of the work being a deduction of
principles, not a collection of institutions, I seized the opportunities
which my reasoning threw in my way, to connect every principle, as I
went along, with every part of the inquiry to which it could refer; and
when I found the connexion sufficiently shewn, I broke off such
disquisitions as would have led me from the object then present.
When principles thus casually applied in one part to matters intended to
be afterwards treated of in another, came to be taken up a-new, they
involved me in what may appear prolixity. This I found most unavoidable,
when I was led to thoughts which were new to myself, and consequently
such as must cost me the greatest labour to set in a clear and distinct
point of view. Had I been master of my subject on setting out, the
arrangement of the whole would have been rendered more concise: but had
this been the case, I should never have been able to go through the
painful deduction which forms the whole chain of my reasoning, and upon
which, to many readers, slow in forming combinations, the conviction it
carries along with it in a great measure depends: to the few, again, of
a more penetrating genius, to whom the slightest hint is sufficient to
lay open every consequence before it be drawn, in allusion to Horace, I
offer this apology, _Clarus esse laboro, prolixus fio_.
The path I have taken was new to me, after all I had read on the
subject. I examined what I had gathered from others by my own
principles; and according as I found it tally with collateral
circumstances, I concluded in its favour. When, on the other hand, I
found a disagreement, I was apprized immediately of some mistake: and
this I found constantly owing to the narrowness of the combinations upon
which it had been founded.
The great danger of running into error upon particular points relating
to this subject, proceeds from our viewing them in a light too confined,
and to our not attending to the influence of concomitant circumstances,
which render general rules of little use. Men of parts and knowledge
seldom fail to reason consequentially on every subject; but when their
inquiries are connected with the complicated interests of society, the
vivacity of an author’s genius is apt to prevent him from attending to
the variety of circumstances which render every consequence, almost,
which he can draw, uncertain. To this I ascribe the habit of running
into what the French call _Systemes_. These are no more than a chain of
contingent consequences, drawn from a few fundamental maxims, adopted,
perhaps, rashly. Such systems are mere conceits; they mislead the
understanding, and efface the path to truth. An induction is formed,
from whence a conclusion, called a principle, is drawn; but this is no
sooner done, than the author extends its influence far beyond the limits
of the ideas present to his understanding, when he made his deduction.
The imperfection of language engages us frequently in disputes merely
verbal; and instead of being on our guard against the many unavoidable
ambiguities attending the most careful speech, we place a great part of
our learning when at school, and of our wit when we appear on the stage
of the world, in the prostitution of language. The learned delight in
vague, and the witty in equivocal terms. In general, we familiarize
ourselves so much with words, and think so little, when we speak and
write, that the signs of our ideas take the place of the images which
they were intended to represent.
Every true proposition, when understood, must be assented to
_universally_. This is the case always, when simple ideas are affirmed
or denied of each other. No body ever doubted that sound is the object
of hearing, or colour that of sight, or that black is not white. But
whenever a dispute arises concerning a proposition, wherein complex
ideas are compared, we may often rest assured, that the parties do not
understand each other. Luxury, says one, is incompatible with the
prosperity of a state. Luxury is the fountain of a nation’s welfare and
happiness, says another. There may, in reality, be no difference in the
sentiments of these two persons. The first may consider luxury as
prejudicial to foreign trade, and as corrupting the morals of a people.
The other may consider luxury as the means of providing employment for
such as must live by their industry, and of promoting an equable
circulation of wealth and subsistence, through all the classes of
inhabitants. If each of them had attended to the combination of the
other’s complex idea of luxury, with all its consequences, they would
have rendered their propositions less general.
The difference, therefore, of opinion between men is frequently more
apparent than real. When we compare our own ideas, we constantly see
their relations with perspicuity; but when we come to communicate those
relations to other people, it is often impossible to put them into words
sufficiently expressive of the precise combination we have made in our
own minds.
This being the case, I have avoided, as much as possible, condemning
such opinions as I have taken the liberty to review; because I have
examined such only as have been advanced by men of genius and
reputation: and since all matters of controversy regard the comparison of
our _ideas_, if the terms we use to express them were sufficiently
understood by both parties, most political disputes would, I am
persuaded, be soon at an end.
Here it may be objected, that we frequently adopt an opinion, without
being able to give a sufficient reason for it, and yet we cannot gain
upon ourselves to give it up, though we find it combated by the
strongest arguments.
To this I answer, that in such cases we do not adhere to our own
opinions, but to those of others, received upon trust. It is our regard
for the authority, and not for the opinion, which makes us tenacious:
for if the opinion were truly our own, we could not fail of seeing, or
at least we should not long be at a loss in recollecting the ground upon
which it is built. But when we assent implicitly to any political
doctrine, there is no room for reason: we then satisfy ourselves with
the persuasion that those whom we trust have sufficient reasons for what
they advance. While our assent therefore is implicit, we are beyond
conviction; not because we do not perceive the force of the arguments
brought against our opinion, but because we are ignorant of the force of
those which can be brought to support it: and as no body will sell what
belongs to him, without being previously informed of its value, so no
body will give up an implicit opinion, without knowing all that can be
said for it. To this class of men I do not address myself in my
inquiries.
But I insensibly run into a metaphysical speculation, to prove, that in
political questions it is better for people to judge from experience and
reason, than from authority; to explain their terms, than to dispute
about words; and to extend their combinations, than to follow conceits,
however decorated with the name of systems. How far I have avoided such
defects, the reader will determine.
Every writer values himself upon his impartiality; because he is not
sensible of his fetters. The wandering and independent life I have led
may naturally have set me free, in some measure, from strong attachments
to popular opinions. This may be called impartiality. But as no man can
be deemed impartial, who leans to any side whatever, I have been
particularly on my guard against the consequences of this sort of
negative impartiality, as I have found it sometimes carrying me too far
from that to which a national prejudice might have led me.
In discussing general points, the best method I found to maintain a just
balance in that respect, was to avert my eye from the country in which I
lived at the time; and to judge of absent things by the absent. Objects
which are present, are apt to produce perceptions too strong to be
impartially compared with those recalled only by memory.
When I have had occasion to dip into any question concerning the
preference to be given to certain forms of government above others, and
to touch upon points which have been the object of sharp disputes, I
have given my opinion with freedom, when it seemed proper: and in
stating the question, I have endeavoured to avoid all trite, and, as I
may call them, technical terms of party, which are of no other use than
to assist the disputants in their attempts to blacken each other, and to
throw dust in the eyes of their readers.
I have sometimes entred so heartily into the spirit of the statesman,
that I have been apt to forget my situation in the society in which I
live; and when the private man reads over the politician, his natural
partiality in favour of individuals, leads him to condemn, as
Machiavellian principles, every sentiment approving the sacrifice of
private concerns, in favour of a general plan.
In order, therefore, to reconcile me to myself in this particular, and
to prevent certain expressions, here and there interspersed, from making
the slightest impression upon a reader of delicate sentiments, I must
observe, that nothing would have been so easy as to soften many
passages, where the politician appears to have snatched the pen out of
the hand of the private citizen: but as I write for such only who can
follow a close reasoning, and attend to the general scope of the whole
inquiry, I have, purposely, made no correction; but continued painting
in the strongest colours, every inconvenience which must affect certain
individuals living under our free modern governments, whenever a wise
statesman sets about correcting old abuses, proceeding from idleness,
sloth or fraud in the lower classes, arbitrary jurisdictions in the
higher, and neglects in administrations, with respect to the interests
of both. The more any cure is painful and dangerous, the more ought men
to be careful in avoiding the disease. This leads me to say a word
concerning the connection between the theory of morals and that of
politics.
I lay it down as a general maxim, that the characteristic of a good
action consists in the conformity between the motive, and the duty of
the agent. If there were but one man upon earth, his duty would contain
no other precepts than those dictated by self-love. If he comes to be a
father, a husband, a friend, his self-love falls immediately under
limitations: he must withhold from himself, and give to his children; he
must know how to sacrifice some of his fancies, in order to gratify, now
and then, those of his wife, or of his friend. If he comes to be a
judge, a magistrate, he must frequently forget that he is a friend, or a
father: and if he rises to be a statesman, he must disregard many other
attachments more comprehensive, such as family, place of birth, and
even, in certain cases, his native country. His duty here becomes
relative to the general good of that society of which he is the head:
and as the death of a criminal cannot be imputed to the judge who
condemns him, neither can a particular inconvenience resulting to an
individual, in consequence of a step taken for a general reformation, be
imputed to him who sits at the helm of government.
If it should be asked, of what utility a speculation such as this can be
to a statesman, to whom it is in a manner addressed from the beginning
to the end: I answer, that although it seems addressed to a statesman,
the real object of the inquiry is to influence the spirit of those whom
he governs; and the variety of matter contained in it, may even suggest
useful hints to himself. But his own genius and experience will enable
him to carry such notions far beyond the reach of my combinations.
I have already said that I considered my work as no more than a canvass
prepared for more able hands than mine to work upon. Now although the
sketch it contains be not sufficiently correct, I have still made some
progress, I think, in preparing the way for others to improve upon my
plan, by contriving proper questions to be resolved by men of experience
in the practical part of government.
I leave it therefore to masters in the science to correct and extend my
ideas: and those who have not made the principles of policy their
particular study, may have an opportunity of comparing the exposition I
have given of them with the commonly received opinions concerning many
questions of great importance to society. They will, for instance, be
able to judge how far population can be increased usefully, by
multiplying marriages, and by dividing lands: how far the swelling of
capitals, cities and towns, tends to depopulate a country: how far the
progress of luxury brings distress upon the poor industrious man: how
far restrictions laid upon the corn trade, tend to promote an ample
supply of subsistence in all our markets: how far the increase of public
debts tends to involve us in a general bankruptcy: how far the abolition
of paper currency would have the effect of reducing the price of all
commodities: how far a tax tends to enhance their value: and how far the
diminution of duties is an essential requisite for securing the liberty,
and promoting the prosperity and happiness of a people.
Is it not of the greatest importance to examine, with candour, the
operations by which all Europe has been engaged in a system of policy so
generally declaimed against, and so contrary to that which we hear daily
recommended as the best? And to shew, from the plain principles of
common sense, that our present situation is the unavoidable consequence
of the spirit and manners of the present times, and that it is quite
compatible with all the liberty, affluence, and prosperity, which any
human society ever enjoyed in any age, or under any form of government?
A people taught to expect from a statesman the execution of plans, big
with impossibility and contradiction, will remain discontented under the
government of the best of Kings.
The reader is desired to correct the following errors, especially such
as are distinguished by an asterisk *, which pervert the sense entirely.
ERRATA.
Page. Line.
3. 32. * advantages, r. disadvantages
73. 27. were, r. from
85. 28. * This is the, r. This is not the
89. 12. * supposed to come, r. subsisted
116. 12. productions, r. spontaneous productions
145. 9. * trial, r. Tirol
147. 30. its, r. their
172. 1. * earth, r. cart
208. 29. third, r. fourth
210. 6. lands, r. hands
214. 4. moving, r. removing.
217. 2. turns, r. terms
229. 8. * usefulness, r. uselesness
236. 19. * management, r. mismanagement
266. 21, 22. they correspond, r. it corresponds
290. 2. easily bred, r. bred early
339. 21. * preventing, r. promoting
382. 10. * work, r. worth
391. 8. * next, r. net
425. 27. discovering, r. discoursing
430. 29. _eiò_, r. _ciò_
Ditto 30. _misuro_, r. _misura_
501. 3. * physical, r. political
Ditto 27. competition, r. composition.
515. 17. proportions, r. propositions
552. 12. * bringing, r. coining
601. 9. * diminution, r. denomination
626. 31. * revolution, r. institution
637. ult. }
638. prim. } formally, r. formerly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
OF THE
FIRST VOLUME.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOOK I.
Of Population and Agriculture.
INTRODUCTION, Page 1
CHAP. I. Of the government of mankind, 6
CHAP. II. Of the spirit of a people, 8
CHAP. III. Upon what principles, and from what _natural 17
causes_, do mankind multiply; and what are the effects of
procreation in countries where numbers are not found to
increase?
CHAP. IV. Continuation of the same subject, with regard to 21
the natural and immediate effects of agriculture, as to
population,
CHAP. V. In what manner, and according to what principles 26
and _political causes_ does agriculture augment
population?
CHAP. VI. How the wants of mankind promote their 31
multiplication,
CHAP. VII. The effects of slavery upon the multiplication 36
and employment of mankind,
CHAP. VIII. What proportion of inhabitants is necessary for 41
agriculture, and what proportion may be usefully employed
in every other occupation?
CHAP. IX. What are the principles which regulate the 46
distribution of inhabitants into farms, hamlets, villages,
towns, and cities?
CHAP. X. Of the consequences which result from the 50
reparation of the two principal classes of a people, the
farmers and the free hands, with regard to their dwelling,
CHAP. XI. Of the distribution of inhabitants into classes; 59
of the employments, and multiplication of them,
CHAP. XII. Of the great advantage of combining a well 67
digested theory, and a perfect knowledge of facts, with
the practical part of government, in order to make a
people multiply,
CHAP. XIII. Continuation of the same subject, with regard to 75
the necessity of having exact lists of births, deaths, and
marriages, for every class of inhabitants in a modern
society,
CHAP. XIV. Of the abuse of agriculture and population, 82
CHAP. XV. Application of the above principles to the state 95
of population in _Great Britain_,
CHAP. XVI. Why are some countries found very populous, in 101
respect of others, equally well calculated for
improvement?
CHAP. XVII. In what manner, and according to what 109
proportion, do plenty and scarcity affect a people?
CHAP. XVIII. Of the causes and consequences of a country 114
being fully peopled,
CHAP. XIX. Is the introduction of machines into manufactures 119
prejudicial to the interest of a state, or hurtful to
population?
CHAP. XX. Miscellaneous observations upon agriculture and 124
population,
CHAP. XXI. Recapitulation of the first book, 149
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOOK II.
Of Trade and Industry.
INTRODUCTION, 161
CHAP. I. Of the reciprocal connections between trade and 166
industry,
CHAP. II. Of Demand, 172
CHAP. III. Of the first principles of bartering, and how 175
this grows into trade,
CHAP. IV. How the prices of goods come to be determined by 181
trade,
CHAP. V. How foreign trade opens to an industrious people, 184
and the consequences of it to _the merchants_ who set it on
foot,
CHAP. VI. Consequences of the introduction of a passive 190
foreign trade among a people who live in simplicity and
idleness,
CHAP. VII. Of double competition, 196
CHAP. VIII. Of what is called expence, profit, and loss, 205
CHAP. IX. The general consequences resulting to a trading 206
nation, upon the opening of an active foreign commerce,
CHAP. X. Of the balance of work and demand, 216
CHAP. XI. Why in time this balance is destroyed, 225
CHAP. XII. Of the competition between nations, 232
CHAP. XIII. How far the form of government of a particular 237
country may be favourable or unfavourable to a competition
with other nations, in matters of commerce,
CHAP. XIV. Security, ease, and happiness, no inseparable 250
concomitants of trade and industry,
CHAP. XV. A general view of the principles to be attended to 261
by a statesman, who resolves to establish trade and industry
upon a lasting footing,
CHAP. XVI. Illustration of some principles laid down in the 272
former chapter, relative to the advancement and support of
foreign trade,
CHAP. XVII. Symptoms of decay in foreign trade, 278
CHAP. XVIII. Methods of lowering the price of manufactures, 283
in order to make them vendible in foreign markets,
CHAP. XIX. Of infant, foreign and domestic trade, with 301
respect to the several principles which influence them,
CHAP. XX. Of luxury, 306
CHAP. XXI. Of physical and political necessaries, 311
CHAP. XXII. Preliminary reflections upon inland commerce, 319
CHAP. XXIII. When a nation, which has enriched herself by a 328
reciprocal commerce in manufactures with other nations,
finds the balance of trade turn against her, it is her
interest to put a stop to it altogether,
CHAP. XXIV. What is the proper method to put a stop to a 336
foreign trade in manufactures, when the balance of it turns
against a nation?
CHAP. XXV. When a rich nation finds her foreign trade 343
reduced to the articles of natural produce, what is the best
plan to be followed? And what are the consequences of such a
change of circumstances?
CHAP. XXVI. Of the vibration of the balance of wealth 359
between the subjects of a modern state,
CHAP. XXVII. Circulation, and the balance of wealth, objects 374
worthy of the attention of a modern statesman,
CHAP. XXVIII. Circulation considered with regard to the rise 394
and fall of the price of subsistence and manufactures,
CHAP. XXIX. Circulation with foreign nations, the same thing 414
as the balance of trade,
CHAP. XXX. Miscellaneous questions and observations relative 426
to trade and industry,
CHAP. XXXI. Recapitulation of the second book, 482
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOOK III.
OF MONEY AND COIN.
PART I.
The principles of money deduced, and applied to the coin of Great
Britain.
INTRODUCTION, 523
CHAP. I. Of money of accompt, 526
What money is ——
Definitions ——
Money a scale for measuring value, ——
Principles which determine the value of things 527
Prices not regulated by the quantity of money, ——
But by the relative proportion between commodities and 528
the wants of mankind,
Necessity of distinguishing between money and price, 529
Money of accompt what, and how contrived, ——
Examples of it, 531
Bank money, ——
Angola money, ——
CHAP. II. Of artificial or material money, ——
Usefulness of the precious metals for the making money, 532
Adjusting a standard, what? 533
Debasing and raising a standard, what? 534
The alteration of a standard, how to be discovered? ——
Of alloy, ——
CHAP. III. Incapacities of the metals to perform the office 535
of an invariable measure of value,
1. They vary in their relative value to one another, ——
All measures ought to be invariable, ——
Consequences when they vary, 536
Defects of a silver standard, 537
Arguments in favour of it, ——
Answers to these arguments, 538
Usefulness of an universal measure, 539
They have two values, one as coin, and one as metals, 540
Smaller inconveniences attending material money, ——
It wears in circulation, ——
It is inaccurately coined, 541
The coinage adds to its value, without adding to its ——
weight,
The value of it may be arbitrarily changed, ——
Trade profits of the smallest defects in the coin, ——
CHAP. IV. Methods which may be proposed for lessening the 542
several inconveniences to which material money is liable,
Use of theory in political matters, ——
Five remedies against the effects of the variation ——
between the value of the metals,
Remedies against the other inconveniences, 544
Against the wearing of the coin, ——
Against inaccuracy of coinage, ——
Against the expence of coinage, ——
Against arbitrary changes in the value of coin, 545
CHAP. V. Variations to which the value of the money-unit is ——
exposed from every disorder in the coin,
How the market price of the metals is made to vary, ——
The variation ought to be referred to the _rising_ 546
metal, and never to the _sinking_,
How the money-unit of accompt is made to vary in its 547
value from the variation of the metals,
Consequences of this, ——
The true unit is the mean proportional between the ——
value of the metals,
The unit to be attached to the mean proportion upon a 548
new coinage, not after the metals have varied,
It is better to affix the unit to one, than to both 549
metals,
Variation to which the money-unit is exposed from the ——
wearing of the coin,
Variations to which the money-unit is exposed, from the 550
inaccuracy in the fabrication of the money,
Variation to which the money-unit is exposed from the 551
imposition of coinage,
When coinage is imposed, bullion must be cheaper than ——
coin,
Exception from this rule, 552
Variation to which the money-unit is exposed by the ——
arbitrary operations of Princes in raising and
debasing the coin,
CHAP. VI. How the variations in the intrinsic value of the 553
unit of money must affect all the domestic interests of a
nation,
How this variation affects the interests of debtors and ——
creditors,
A mistake of Mr. Locke, 555
When the value of the unit is diminished, creditors 556
lose; when it is augmented, debtors lose,
CHAP. VII. Of the disorder in the British coin, so far as it 558
occasions the melting down or the exporting of the specie,
Defects in the British coin, ——
Of the standard of the English coin and money-unit, ——
A pound sterling by statute contains 1718.7 grains troy 559
fine silver,
The guinea 118.644 grains fine gold, ——
Coinage in England free, ——
The standard not attached to the gold coin till the 560
year 1728,
Consequences of this regulation to debase the standard, ——
That debtors will not pay in silver but in gold, ——
That some people consider coin as money of accompt, 561
Others consider it as a metal, ——
Operations of money-jobbers, when the coin deviates 562
from the market proportion of the metals, or from the
legal weight,
They melt down when the metals in it are wrong ——
proportioned,
And when the coin is of unequal weight, ——
Why silver bullion is dearer than coin, ——
Because that species has risen in the market price as 563
bullion, and not as coin,
What regulates the price of bullion? 564
1. The intrinsic value of the currency, ——
2. A demand for exporting bullion, 565
3. Or for making of plate, ——
Exchange _raises_, and the mint price _brings down_ ——
bullion,
Continuation of the operations of money-jobbers: their 566
rule for melting the coin,
The price in guineas equal to the price of shillings of ——
65 in the pound troy,
When guineas may be melted down with profit, ——
Silver is exported preferably to gold, 567
This hurtful, when done by foreigners, ——
CHAP. VIII. Of the disorder in the British coin, so far as it 568
affects the value of the pound sterling currency,
Two legal pounds sterling in England, ——
And several others, in consequence of the wearing of 569
the coin,
Why any silver coin remains in England, ——
Value of a pound sterling current determined by the ——
operations of trade,
To the mean value of all the currencies, 570
Exchange a good measure for the value of a pound ——
sterling,
The use of paper money not hurtful in debasing the 571
standard,
The pound sterling not regulated by statute, but by the ——
mean value of the current money,
Why exchange appears so commonly against England, ——
How the market price of bullion shews the value of the ——
pound sterling,
Shillings at present weigh no more than 1⁄65 of a pound 572
troy,
And are worn 4.29 troy grains lighter than their ——
standard weight,
A pound sterling worth, at present, no more than 1638 573
grains troy fine silver, according to the price of
bullion,
And according to the course of exchange, ——
Shillings coined at 65 in the pound troy, would be in 574
proportion with the gold,
Which shews that the standard has been debased, ——
And that the preserving it where it is, is no new ——
debasement,
Proof that the standard has been debased by law, 575
And is at present reduced to the value of the gold, ——
CHAP. IX. Historical account of the variations of the British 576
coin,
Purport of this treatise not to dictate, but to ——
inquire,
How the disorder in the coin may be remedied without ——
inconveniences,
By making the nation itself choose the remedy, 577
If the present standard is departed from, every other ——
that might be pitched on is arbitrary,
People imagine the present standard is the same with 578
that of Queen Elizabeth,
Debasements of the standard during the reformation, ——
Raised by Edward VI. ——
Debased by Elizabeth, ——
Supported by her successors, ——
Until it was debased by the clipping, after the 579
revolution,
Lowndes’s scheme refuted by Locke: the standard raised 580
to that of Elizabeth, and the consequences of that
measure,
Silver has been rising from the beginning of this ——
century,
The English standard has been debased by law, since ——
1726,
The trading interest chiefly to be blamed for this 581
neglect,
Debasing the standard chiefly affects permanent ——
contracts,
And prevents prices from rising as they should do, ——
CHAP. X. Of the disorder of the British coin, so far as it 582
affects the circulation of gold and silver coin, and of the
consequences of reducing guineas to twenty shillings,
Why silver coin is so scarce, 583
Consequences of fixing the guineas at 20 shillings, ——
with regard to circulation,
Will make coin disappear altogether, 584
How light shillings are bought by weight, ——
Consequences as to the circulation with merchants and 585
bankers,
That guineas would still pass current for 21 shillings, ——
That the standard would be affixed to the light silver, ——
as it was in the year 1695,
That merchants would gain by it, 586
Debtors would be ruined, ——
Consequences as to the bank, ——
Reducing guineas to 20 shillings is the same as making 587
them a commodity,
CHAP. XI. Method of restoring the money-unit to the standard ——
of Elizabeth, and the consequences of that revolution,
How to fix the pound sterling at the standard of Queen ——
Elizabeth,
The consequences of this reformation will be to raise 588
the standard _5 per cent._
Every interest in a nation equally intitled to 589
protection,
Those who suffer by the debasement of the standard, ——
Ought only to benefit by the restitution, 590
And not the whole class of creditors, ——
Whose claim ought to be liable to a conversion, 591
According to justice and impartiality, ——
CHAP. XII. _Objections_ stated against the principles laid 592
down in this inquiry, and answers to _them_,
That a pound will always be considered as a pound, 593
That the standard is not debased at present, being ——
fixed to the statute, not to the coin,
That the pound sterling is virtually worth 1718.7 ——
grains fine silver,
That these principles imply a progressive debasement of 594
the standard every new coinage,
That the same argument holds for debasing the standard ——
measures of weights, capacity, &c.
That the wearing of the coin falls on them who possess ——
it at the crying down, but does not debase the
standard,
That inland dealings, not the price of bullion, or ——
course of exchange, regulate the standard,
That public currency supports the value of the coin, ——
That this scheme is the same with that of Lowndes, ——
Answers to these objections, 595
That a pound will be considered at its worth by all ——
debtors, and by those who buy,
If the standard was affixed to the statute, people ——
would be obliged to pay by weight,
No body can be obliged to pay 1718.7 grains fine silver 596
for a pound sterling,
That it is not the regulation of the mint, but the ——
disorder of the coin which must debase the standard,
That people are obliged to measure by the standard 597
weight, but are not obliged to pay by the standard
pound,
That the loss upon light money when called in, does not ——
fall upon the possessors,
That inland dealings cannot support the standard where 599
there are money-jobbers or foreign commerce,
That public currency supports the authority of the 601
coin, not the value of the pound sterling,
That the scheme is similar, though not the same with 602
that of Lowndes,
Lowndes reasoned upon wrong principles, ——
Locke attended to supporting the standard, without ——
attending to the consequences,
Political circumstances are greatly changed, 604
Reconciliation of the two opinions, 606
The question in dispute is not understood, 607
The true characteristic of a change upon the standard ——
is not attended to,
Principles will not operate their effects without the 608
assistance of the state,
When people understand one another, they soon agree, ——
Permanent contracts are confounded with sale in the 609
dispute,
The interest of creditors is always the predominant, 611
and determines the opinion of a nation,
Application of principles to the operation the Dutch 612
have lately made upon their coin,
All decisions in political questions depend upon 613
circumstances,
CHAP. XIII. In what sense the standard may be said to have 614
been debased by law; and in what sense it may be said to
have suffered a gradual debasement by the operation of
political causes,
These proportions appear contradictory, ——
Debased by law, when affixed to the gold, 615
Effects which the changing the proportion of the metals ——
has upon melting the coin, and regulating payments,
Payments made by bankers regulate all others, ——
The standard gradually debased by the rising of the 616
silver,
The proportion of the metals in 1728, supposed to have ——
been as 15.21 is to 1.,
By what progression the silver standard has been ——
debased,
The standard of Elizabeth, for the pound sterling, was 617
1718.7 grains silver, and 157.6 ditto gold, both
fine,
The gold standard of her pound worth, at present, ——
2285.5 grains fine silver,
The variation of the metals has produced three ——
different standards of Elizabeth,
One worth £ 1 0 11⅜ present currency, 618
Another worth £ 1 7 10⅞ ditto, ——
And a third worth £ 1 4 5⅛ ditto, ——
The last is the true standard of Elizabeth for the ——
pound sterling, and worth at present 2002 grains fine
silver, and 138 ditto gold,
But may vary at every moment, 619
Gold rose during the whole 17th century, ——
And silver has risen since the beginning of this ——
century,
Some positions recapitulated, 620
CHAP. XIV. Circumstances to be attended to in a new 621
regulation of the British coin,
The adopting of the standard of Elizabeth, has an air ——
of justice,
Advantages of that of Mary I., ——
Conversions necessary in every case, 622
Every interest within the state to be examined, ——
Landed interest examined, ——
Interest of the public creditors examined, 625
Interest of trade examined, 628
Interest of buyers and sellers examined, ——
Interest of the bank examined, 629
Inconveniences attending all innovations, 632
Argument for preserving the standard at the present ——
value,
That every change must either hurt the bank, or the ——
public creditors,
A more easy method of making a change upon the 633
standard,
CHAP. XV. Regulations which the principles of this inquiry 634
point out as expedient to be made, by a new statute for
regulating the British coin,
1. Regulation as to the standard, ——
2. As to the weight, ——
3. Mint price, ——
4. Denominations, 635
5. Marking the weight on the coins, ——
6. Liberty to stipulate payment in gold or silver, ——
7. Creditors may demand payment, half in gold, and half ——
in silver,
8. Regulations as to sale, ——
9. Ditto as to payments to and from banks, &c., ——
10. All coin to be of full weight, when paid away, ——
11. Liberty to melt or export coin, but death to clip ——
or wash,
12. Rule for changing the mint price of the metals, 636
13. When to change the mint price, ——
14. Rule for changing the denomination of the coins, ——
15. How contracts are to be acquitted, after a change ——
of the denomination has taken place,
16. The weight of the several coins never to be 638
changed, except upon a general recoinage of one
denomination at least,
How these regulations will preserve the same value to ——
the pound sterling at all times, and how fractions in
the denomination of coin may be avoided,
17. Small coins to be current only for 20 years, and 639
large coins for 40 years, or more,
18. All foreign coins to pass for bullion only, ——
Consequences of these regulations, ——
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AN
INQUIRY
INTO THE
PRINCIPLES OF POLITICAL OECONOMY.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOOK I.
OF POPULATION AND AGRICULTURE.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION.
Oeconomy in general is the art of providing for all the wants of a
family, with prudence and frugality.
If any thing necessary or useful is found wanting, if any thing provided
is lost or misapplied, if any servant, any animal, is supernumerary or
useless, if any one sick or infirm is neglected, we immediately perceive
a want of oeconomy. The object of it, in a private family, is therefore
to provide for the nourishment, the other wants, and the employment of
every individual. In the first place, for the master, who is the head,
and who directs the whole; next for the children, who interest him above
all other things; and last for the servants, who being useful to the
head, and essential to the well-being of the family, have therefore a
title to become an object of the master’s care and concern.
The whole oeconomy must be directed by the head, who is both lord and
steward of the family. It is however necessary, that these two offices
be not confounded with one another. As lord, he establishes the laws of
his oeconomy; as steward, he puts them in execution. As lord, he may
restrain and give his commands to all within the house as he thinks
proper; as steward, he must conduct with gentleness and address, and is
bound by his own regulations. The better the oeconomist, the more
uniformity is perceived in all his actions, and the less liberties are
taken to depart from stated rules. He is no ways master to break through
the laws of his oeconomy, although in every respect he may keep each
individual within the house, in the most exact subordination to his
commands. Oeconomy and government, even in a private family, present
therefore two different ideas, and have also two different objects.
What oeconomy is in a family, political oeconomy is in a state: with
these essential differences however, that in a state there are no
servants, all are children: that a family may be formed when and how a
man pleases, and he may establish what plan of oeconomy he thinks fit;
but states are found formed, and the oeconomy of these depends upon a
thousand circumstances. The statesman (this is a general term to signify
the head, according to the form of government) is neither master to
establish what oeconomy he pleases, or in the exercise of his sublime
authority to overturn at will the established laws of it, let him be the
most despotic monarch upon earth.
The great art therefore of political oeconomy is, first to adapt the
different operations of it to the spirit, manners, habits, and customs
of the people, and afterwards to model these circumstances so, as to be
able to introduce a set of new and more useful institutions.
The principal object of this science is to secure a certain fund of
subsistence for all the inhabitants, to obviate every circumstance which
may render it precarious; to provide every thing necessary for supplying
the wants of the society, and to employ the inhabitants (supposing them
to be freemen) in such a manner as naturally to create reciprocal
relations and dependencies between them, so as to make their several
interests lead them to supply one another with their reciprocal wants.
If one considers the variety which is found in different countries, in
the distribution of property, subordination of classes, genius of
people, proceeding from the variety of forms of government, laws, and
manners, one may conclude, that the political oeconomy in each must
necessarily be different, and that principles, however universally true,
may become quite ineffectual in practice, without a sufficient
preparation of the spirit of a people.
It is the business of a statesman to judge of the expediency of
different schemes of oeconomy, and by degrees to model the minds of his
subjects so as to induce them, from the allurement of private interest,
to concur in the execution of his plan.
The speculative person, who removed from the practice, extracts the
principles of this science from _observation_ and _reflection_, should
divest himself, as far as possible, of every prejudice, in favour of
established opinions, however reasonable, when examined relatively to
particular nations: he must do his utmost to become a citizen of the
world, comparing customs, examining minutely institutions which appear
alike, when in different countries they are found to produce different
effects: he should examine the cause of such differences with the utmost
diligence and attention. It is from such inquiries that the true
principles are discovered.
He who takes up the pen upon this subject, keeping in his eye the
customs of his own or any other country, will fall more naturally into a
description of one particular system of it, than into an examination of
the principles of the science in general: he will applaud such
institutions as he finds rightly administred at home; he will condemn
those which are administred with abuse; but, without comparing different
methods of executing the same plan in different countries, he will not
easily distinguish the disadvantages which are essential to the
institution, from those which proceed from the abuse. For this reason a
land tax excites the indignation of a Frenchman, an excise that of an
Englishman. One who looks into the execution of both, in each country,
and in every branch of management, will discover the real effects of
these impositions, and be able to distinguish what proceeds from abuse,
from what is essential to the burden.
Nothing is more effectual towards preparing the spirit of a people to
receive a good plan of oeconomy, than a proper representation of it. On
the other hand, nothing is better calculated to keep the statesman, who
is at the head of affairs, in awe.
When principles are well understood, the real consequences of burdensome
institutions are clearly seen: when the purposes they are intended for,
are not obtained, the abuse of the statesman’s administration appears
palpable. People then will not so much cry out against the imposition,
as against the misapplication. It will not be a land tax of four
shillings in the pound, nor an excise upon wines and tobacco, which will
excite the murmurs of a nation; it will be the prodigal dissipation and
misapplication of the amount of these taxes after they are laid on. But
when principles are not known, all inquiry is at an end, the moment a
nation can be engaged to submit to the burden. It is the same with
regard to every other part of this science.
Having pointed out the object of my pursuit, I shall only add, that my
intention is to attach myself principally to a clear deduction of
principles, and a short application of them to familiar examples, in
order to avoid abstraction as much as possible. I farther intend to
confine myself to such parts of this extensive subject, as shall appear
the most interesting in the general system of modern politics, of which
I shall treat with that spirit of liberty, which reigns more and more
every day, throughout all the polite and flourishing nations of Europe.
When I compare the elegant performances which have appeared in Great
Britain and in France with my dry and abstracted manner of treating the
same subject, in a plain language void of ornament, I own I am
discouraged on many accounts. If I am obliged to set out by laying down
as fundamental principles the most obvious truths, I dread the
imputation of pedantry, and of pretending to turn common sense into
science. If I follow these principles through a minute detail, I may
appear trifling. I therefore hope the reader will believe me, when I
tell him, that these defects have not escaped my discernment, but that
my genius, the nature of the work, and the connection of the subject,
have obliged me to write in an order and in a stile where every thing
has been sacrificed to perspicuity.
My principal aim shall be to discover truth, and to enable my reader to
touch the very link of the chain where I may at any time go astray.
My business shall not be to seek for new thoughts, but to reason
consequentially; and if any thing new be found, it will be in the
conclusions.
Long steps in political reasoning lead to error; close reasoning is
tedious, and to many appears trivial: this however must be my plan, and
my consolation is, that the further I advance, I shall become the more
interesting.
Every supposition must be considered as strictly relative to the
circumstances presupposed; and though, in order to prevent
misapplication, and to avoid abstraction as much as possible, I
frequently make use of examples for illustrating every principle; yet
these, which are taken from matters of fact, must be supposed divested
of every foreign circumstance inconsistent with the supposition.
I shall combat no particular opinion in such intricate matters; though
sometimes I may pass them in review, in order to point out how I am led
to differ from them.
I pretend to form no system, but by following out a succession of
principles, consistent with the nature of man and with one another, I
shall endeavour to furnish some materials towards the forming of a good
one.
CHAP. I.
_Of the Government of Mankind._
Man we find acting uniformly in all ages, in all countries, and in all
climates, from the principles of self-interest, expediency, duty, or
passion. In this he is alike, in nothing else.
These motives of human actions produce such a variety of combinations,
that if we consider the several species of animals in the creation, we
shall find the individuals in no class so unlike to one another, as man
to man. No wonder then if people differ in opinion with regard to every
thing which relates to man.
As this noble animal is a sociable creature, both from necessity and
inclination, we also find, in all ages, climates and countries, a
certain modification of government and subordination established among
them. Here again we are presented with as great variety as there are
different societies; all however agreeing in this, that the end of a
_voluntary_ subordination to authority is with a view to promote the
general good.
Constant and uninterrupted experience has proved to man, that virtue and
justice in those who govern, are sufficient to render the society happy,
under any form of government. Virtue and justice when applied to
government mean no more than a tender affection for the whole society,
and an exact and impartial regard for the interest of every class.
All actions, and indeed all things, are good or bad only by relation.
Nothing is so complex as relations when considered with regard to a
society, and nothing is so difficult as to discover truth when involved
and blended with these relations.
We must not conclude from this, that every operation of government
becomes problematical and uncertain as to its consequences: some are
evidently good; others are notoriously bad: the middle terms are always
the least essential, and the more complex they appear to a discerning
eye, the more trivial they are found to be in their immediate
consequences.
A government must be continually in action, and one principal object of
its attention must be, the consequences and effects of new institutions.
Experience alone will shew, what human prudence could not foresee; and
mistakes must be corrected as often as expediency requires.
All governments have what they call their fundamental laws; but
fundamental, that is, invariable laws, can never subsist among men, the
most variable thing we know: the only fundamental law, _salus populi_,
must ever be relative, like every other thing. But this is rather a
maxim than a law.
It is however expedient, nay absolutely necessary, that in every state,
certain laws be supposed fundamental and invariable: both to serve as a
curb to the ambition of individuals, and to point out to the statesman
the out-lines, or sketch of that plan of government, which experience
has proved to be the best adapted to the spirit of his people.
Such laws may even be considered as actually invariable, while a state
subsists without convulsions or revolutions: because then the
alterations are so gradual, that they become imperceptible to all, but
the most discerning, who compare the customs and manners of the same
people in different periods of time and under different combinations of
circumstances.
As we have taken for granted the fundamental maxim, that every operation
of government should be calculated for the good of the people, so we may
with equal certainty decide, that in order to make a people happy, they
must be governed according to the spirit which prevails among them.
I am next to explain what I mean by the spirit of a people, and to shew
how far this spirit must be made to influence the government of every
society.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAP. II.
_Of the Spirit of a People._
The spirit of a people is formed upon a set of received opinions
relative to three objects; morals, government, and manners: these once
generally adopted by any society, confirmed by long and constant habit,
and never called in question, form the basis of all laws, regulate the
form of every government, and determine what is commonly called the
customs of a country.
To know a people we must examine them under those general heads. We
acquire the knowledge of their morals with ease, by consulting the
tenets of their religion, and from what is taught among them by
authority and under direction.
The second, or government, is more disguised, as it is constantly
changing from circumstances, partly resulting from domestic and partly
from foreign considerations. A thorough knowledge of their history, and
conversation with their statesmen, may give one, who has access to these
helps, a very competent knowledge of this branch.
The last, or the knowledge of the manners of a people, is by far the
most difficult to acquire, and yet is the most open to every person’s
observation. Certain circumstances with regard to manners are supposed
by every one in the country to be so well known, so generally followed
and observed, that it seldom occurs to any body to inform a stranger
concerning them. In one country nothing is so injurious as a stroke with
a stick, or even a gesture which implies a design or a desire to
strike[B]: in another a stroke is nothing, but an opprobrious expression
is not to be borne[C]. An innocent liberty with the fair sex, which in
one country passes without censure, is looked upon in another as the
highest indignity[D].
Footnote B:
France.
Footnote C:
Germany.
Footnote D:
Spain.
In general, the opinion of a people with regard to injuries is
established by custom only, and nothing is more necessary in government,
than an exact attention to every circumstance peculiar to the people to
be governed.
The kingdom of Spain was lost for a violence committed upon chastity[E];
the city of Genoa for a blow[F]; the kingdoms of Naples and Sicily have
ever been ready to revolt; because having been for many ages under the
dominion of strangers, the people have never been governed according to
the true spirit of their manners. Let us consult the revolutions of all
countries, and we shall find, that the most trivial circumstances have
had a greater influence on the event, than the more weighty reasons,
which are always set forth as the real motives. I need not enlarge upon
this subject, my intention is only to suggest an idea which any one may
pursue, and which will be applied upon many occasions as we go along;
for there is no treating any point which regards the political oeconomy
of a nation, without accompanying the example with some supposition
relative to the spirit of the people. I return.
Footnote E:
By Roderigo, the last king of the Gothic line.
Footnote F:
Given by an Austrian officer to a Genoese, which occasioned the revolt
in 1747, by which the Germans were expelled the city.
I have said, that the most difficult thing to learn concerning a people,
is the spirit of their manners. Consequently, the most difficult thing
for a stranger to adopt, is their manner. Men acquire the language, nay
even lose the foreign accent, before they lose the oddity of their
manner. The reason is plain. The inclinations must be changed, the taste
of amusement must be new modelled; established maxims upon government,
manners, nay even upon some moral actions, must undergo certain new
modifications, before the stranger’s conversation and behaviour becomes
consistent with the spirit of the people with whom he lives.
From these considerations, we may find the reason, why nothing is more
heavy to bear than the government of conquerors, in spite of all their
endeavours to render themselves agreeable to the conquered. Of this
experience has ever proved the truth, and princes are so much persuaded
of it, that when a country is subdued in our days, or when it otherwise
changes masters, there is seldom any question of altering, but by very
slow degrees and length of time, the established laws and customs of the
inhabitants. I might safely say, there is no form of government upon
earth so excellent in itself, as, necessarily, to make the people happy
under it. Freedom itself, _imposed_ upon a people groaning under the
greatest slavery, will not make them happy, unless it is made to undergo
certain modifications, relative to their established habits.
Having explained what I mean by the spirit of a people, I come next to
consider, how far this spirit must influence government.
If governments be taken in general, we shall find them analogous to the
spirit of the people. But the point under consideration is, how a
statesman is to proceed, when expediency and refinement require a change
of administration, or when it becomes necessary from a change of
circumstances.
The great alteration in the affairs of Europe within these three
centuries, by the discovery of America and the Indies, the springing up
of industry and learning, the introduction of trade and the luxurious
arts, the establishment of public credit, and a general system of
taxation, have entirely altered the plan of government every where.
From feudal and military, it is become free and commercial. I oppose
freedom in government to the feudal system, only to mark that there is
not found now, that chain of subordination among the subjects, which
made the essential part of the feudal form. The head there had little
power, and the lower classes of the people little liberty. Now every
industrious man, who lives with oeconomy, is free and independent, under
most forms of government. Formerly, the power of the barons swallowed up
the independency of all inferior classes. I oppose commercial to
military, only because the military governments now are made to subsist
from the consequences and effects of commerce: that is, from the revenue
of the state, proceeding from taxes. Formerly, every thing was brought
about by numbers; now, numbers of men cannot be kept together without
money.
This is sufficient to point out the nature of the revolution in the
political state, and of consequence in the manners of Europe.
The spirit of a people changes no doubt of itself, but by slow degrees.
The same generation commonly adheres to the same principles, and retains
the same spirit. In every country we find two generations upon the stage
at a time; that is to say, we may distribute into two classes the spirit
which prevails; the one amongst men between twenty and thirty, when
opinions are forming; the other of those who are past fifty, when
opinions and habits are formed and confirmed. A person of judgment and
observation may foresee many things relative to government, from an
exact application to the rise and progress of new customs and opinions,
provided he preserve his mind free from all attachments and prejudices,
in favour of those which he himself has adopted, and in that delicacy of
sensation necessary to perceive the influence of a change of
circumstances. This is the genius proper to form a great statesman.
In every new step the spirit of the people should be first examined, and
if that be not found ripe for the execution of the plan, it ought to be
put off, kept entirely secret, and every method used to prepare the
people to relish the innovation.
The project of introducing popery into England was blown before it was
put in practice, and so misgave. Queen Elizabeth kept her own secret,
and succeeded in a similar attempt. The scheme of a general excise was
pushed with too much vivacity, was made a matter of party, ill-timed,
and the people nowise prepared for it; hence it will be the more
difficult to bring about at another time, without the greatest
precautions.
In turning and working upon the spirit of a people, nothing is
impossible to an able statesman. When a people can be engaged to murder
their wives and children, and to burn themselves, rather than submit to
a foreign enemy, when they can be brought to give their most precious
effects, their ornaments of gold and silver, for the support of a common
cause; when women are brought to give their hair to make ropes, and the
most decrepit old men to mount the walls of a town for its defence; I
think I may say, that by properly conducting and managing the spirit of
a people, nothing is impossible to be accomplished. But when I say,
nothing is impossible, I must be understood to mean, that nothing
essentially necessary for the good of the people is impossible; and this
is all that is required in government.
That it requires a particular talent in a statesman to dispose the minds
of a people to approve even of the scheme which is the most conducive to
their interest and prosperity, appears from this; that we see examples
of wise, rich and powerful nations languishing in inactivity, at a time
when every individual is animated with a quite contrary spirit; becoming
a prey to their enemies, like the city of Jerusalem, while they are
taken up with their domestic animosities, only because the remedies
proposed against these evils contradict the spirit of the times[G].
Footnote G:
This was writ in the year 1756, about the time the island of Minorca
was taken by the French.
The great art of governing is to divest one’s self of prejudices and
attachments to particular opinions, particular classes, and above all to
particular persons; to consult the spirit of the people, to give way to
it in appearance, and in so doing to give it a turn capable of inspiring
those sentiments which may induce them to relish the change, which an
alteration of circumstances has rendered necessary.
Can any change be greater among free men, than from a state of absolute
liberty and independency to become subject to constraint in the most
trivial actions? This change has however taken place over all Europe
within these three hundred years, and yet we think ourselves more free
than ever our fathers were. Formerly a gentleman who enjoyed a bit of
land knew not what it was to have any demand made upon him, but in
virtue of obligations by himself contracted. He disposed of the fruits
of the earth, and of the labour of his servants or vassals, as he
thought fit. Every thing was bought, sold, transferred, transported,
modified, and composed, for private consumption, or for public use,
without ever the state’s being once found interested in what was doing.
This, I say, was formerly the general situation of Europe, among free
nations under a regular administration; and the only impositions
commonly known to affect landed men were made in consequence of a
contract of subordination, feudal or other, which had certain
limitations; and the impositions were appropriated for certain purposes.
Daily experience shews, that nothing is more against the inclinations of
a people, than the imposition of taxes; and the less they are accustomed
to them, the more difficult it is to get them established.
The great abuse of governors in the application of taxes contributes not
a little to augment and entertain this repugnancy in the governed: but
besides abuse, there is often too little management used to prepare the
spirits of the people for such innovations: for we see them upon many
occasions submitting with chearfulness to very heavy impositions,
provided they be well-timed, and consistent with their manners and
disposition. A French gentleman, who cannot bear the thought of being
put upon a level with a peasant in paying a land tax, pays contentedly,
in time of war, a general tax upon all his effects, under a different
name. To pay for your head is terrible in one country; to pay for light
appears as terrible in another.
It often happens, that statesmen take the hint of new impositions from
the example of other nations, and not from a nice examination of their
own domestic circumstances. But when these are rightly attended to, it
becomes easy to discover the means of executing the same plan, in a way
quite adapted to the spirit, temper, and circumstances of the people.
When strangers are employed as statesmen, the disorder is still greater,
unless in cases of most extraordinary penetration, temper, and above all
flexibility and discretion.
Statesmen have sometimes recourse to artifice instead of reason, because
their intentions often are not upright. This destroys all confidence
between them and the people; and confidence is necessary when you are in
a manner obliged to ask a favor, or when at least what you demand is not
indisputably your right. A people thus tricked into an imposition,
though expedient for their prosperity, will oppose violently, at another
time, a like measure, even when essential to their preservation.
At other times, we see statesmen presenting the allurement of present
ease, precisely at the time when people’s minds are best disposed to
receive a burden. I mean when war threatens, and when the mind is heated
with a resentment of injuries. Is it not wonderful, at such a time as
this, to increase taxes only in proportion to the interest of money
wanted; does not this imply a shortsightedness, or at least an
indifference as to what is to come? Is it not more natural, that a
people should consent to come under burdens to gratify revenge, than
submit to repay a large debt when their minds are in a state of
tranquillity.
From the examples I have given, I hope what I mean by the spirit of a
people is sufficiently understood, and I think I have abundantly shewn
the necessity of its being properly disposed, in order to establish a
right plan of oeconomy. This is so true, that many examples may be
found, of a people’s rejecting the most beneficial institutions, and
even the greatest favors, only because some circumstance had shocked
their established customs. No wonder then, if we see them refuse to come
under limitations, restraints and burdens, when the utmost they can be
flattered with from them, is a distant prospect of national good.
I have found it necessary to premise these general reflections, in order
to obviate many objections which might naturally enough occur in the
perusal of this inquiry. I shall have occasion to make a number of
suppositions, and to draw consequences from them, which are abundantly
natural, if a proper spirit in the people be presupposed, but which
would be far from being natural without this supposition. I suppose, for
example, that a poor man, loaded with many children, would be glad to
have the state maintain them; that another, who has wasted lands, would
be obliged to one who would gratuitously build him a farm-house upon it.
Yet in both suppositions I may prove mistaken; for fathers there are,
who would rather see their children dead than out of their hands; and
proprietors are to be found, who, for the sake of hunting, would lay the
finest country in Europe into a waste.
In order to communicate an adequate idea of what I understand by
political oeconomy, I have explained the term, by pointing out the
object of the art; which is, to provide food, other necessaries, and
employment to every one of the society.
This is a very simple and a very general method of defining a most
complicated operation.
To provide a proper employment for all the members of a society, is the
same as to model and conduct every branch of their concerns.
Upon this idea, I think, may be formed the most extensive basis for an
inquiry into the principles of political oeconomy.
The next thing to be done, is to fall upon a distinct method of
analysing so extensive a subject, by contriving a train of ideas, which
may be directed towards every part of the plan, and which, at the same
time, may be made to arise methodically from one another.
For this purpose I have taken a hint from what the late revolutions in
the politics of Europe have pointed out to be the regular progress of
mankind, from great simplicity to complicated refinement.
This first book shall then set out by taking up society in the cradle,
as I may say. I shall then examine the principles which influence their
multiplication, the method of providing for their subsistence, the
origin of their labour, the effects of their liberty and slavery, the
distribution of them into classes, with some other topics which relate
to mankind in general.
Here we shall find the principles of industry influencing the
multiplication of mankind, and the cultivation of the soil. This I have
thrown in on purpose to prepare my reader for the subject of the second
book; where he will find the same principle (under the wings of liberty)
providing an easy subsistence for a numerous populace, by the means of
trade, which sends the labour of an industrious people over the whole
world.
From the experience of what has happened these last two hundred years,
we find to what a pitch the trade and industry of Europe has increased
alienations, and the circulation of money. I shall, therefore, closely
adhere to these, as the most immediate consequences of the preceding
improvement; and, by analysing them, I shall form my third book, in
which I intend to treat of credit.
We see also how credit has engaged nations to avail themselves of it in
their wars, and how, by the use of it, they have been led to contract
debts; which they never can satisfy and pay, without imposing taxes. The
doctrine then of debts and taxes will very naturally follow that of
credit in this great chain of political consequences.
By this kind of historical clue, I shall conduct myself through the
great avenues of this extensive labyrinth; and in my review of every
particular district, I shall step from consequence to consequence, until
I have penetrated into the utmost recesses of my own understanding.
When a subject is broken off, I shall render my transitions as gradual
as I can, by still preserving some chain of connexion; and although I
cannot flatter myself (in such infinite variety of choice, as to order
and distribution) to hit off, at all times, that method, which may
appear to every reader the most natural and the most correct, yet I
shall spare no pains in casting the materials into different forms, so
as to make the best distribution of them in my power.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAP. III.
_Upon what Principles, and from what_ natural Causes _do Mankind
multiply? And what are the effects of Procreation in Countries where
Numbers are not found to increase?_
The multiplication of mankind has been treated of in different ways;
some have made out tables to shew the progression of multiplications,
others have treated the question historically. The state of numbers in
different ages of the world, or in different countries at different
times, has been made the object of inquiry; and the most exact scrutiny
into antient authors, the means of investigating the truth of this
matter. All passages relative to the subject have been laid together,
and accompanied with glosses and interpretations the most plausible, in
order to determine the main question. The elaborate performances of Mr.
Hume, and Mr. Wallace, who have adopted opposite opinions in regard to
the populousness of the antient world, have left nothing new to be said
upon this subject; at least the application they appear to have given in
examining the antients, is a great discouragement to any one who might
otherwise still flatter himself, there, to find out circumstances proper
to cast a new light upon the question.
My intention in this chapter is not to decide, nor even to give my
opinion upon that matter, far less to combat the arguments advanced on
either side. I am to consider the question under a different point of
view; not to enquire what numbers of people were found upon the earth at
a certain time, but to examine the natural and rational causes of
multiplication. If we can discover these, we may perhaps be led to judge
how far they might have operated in different ages and in different
countries.
The fundamental principle of the multiplication of all animals, and
consequently of man, is generation; the next is food: generation gives
existence, food preserves it. Did the earth produce of itself the proper
nourishment for man, with unlimited abundance, we should find no
occasion to labour in order to procure it. Now in all countries found
inhabited, as in those which have been found desolate, if the state of
animals be inquired into, the number of them will be found in proportion
to the quantity of food produced by the earth, _regularly throughout the
year_, for their subsistence. I say, regularly throughout the year,
because we perceive in those animals which produce in great abundance,
such as all the feathered genus, that vast multitudes are destroyed in
winter; they are brought forth with the fruits of the earth, and fall in
proportion. This principle is so natural, that I think it can hardly be
controverted.
As to man, the earth does not spontaneously produce nourishment for him
in any considerable degree. I allow that as some species of animals
support life by devouring others, so may man; but it must be observed,
that the species feeding must always be much inferior in number to the
species fed upon. This is evident in reason and in fact.
Were the earth therefore uncultivated, the numbers of mankind would not
exceed the proportion of the spontaneous fruits which she offers for
their immediate use, or for that of the animals which might be the
proper nourishment of man.
There is therefore a certain number of mankind which the earth would be
able to maintain without any labour: allow me to call this quantity (A).
Does it not, from this exposition of the matter, appear plain, that
without labour (A) never can increase any more than animals, which do
not work for themselves, can increase beyond the proportion of food
provided for them by nature? Let it be however observed, that I do not
pretend to limit (A) to a determined number. The seasons will no doubt
influence the numbers of mankind, as we see they influence the plenty of
other animals; but I say (A) will never increase beyond the fixed
proportion above-mentioned.
Having resolved one question with regard to multiplication, and shewn
that numbers must become greater or smaller according to the productions
of nature, I come to the second thing proposed to be treated of in the
chapter: to wit, what will become of the generative faculty after it has
produced the full proportion of (A), and what effects will afterwards
follow.
We see how beneficent, I might have said prodigal, nature is, in
bestowing life by generation. Several kinds of animals, especially
insects, multiply by thousands, and yet the species does not appear
annually to increase. No body can pretend that particular individuals of
any species have a privilege to live, and that others die from a
difference in their nature. It is therefore reasonable to conclude, that
what destroys such vast quantities of those produced, must be, among
other causes, the want of food. Let us apply this to man.
Those who are supposed to be fed with the spontaneous fruits of the
earth, cannot, from what has been said, multiply beyond that proportion;
at the same time the generative faculty will work its natural effects in
augmenting numbers. The consequence will be, that certain individuals
must become worse fed, consequently weaker; consequently, if in that
weakly state, nature should withold a part of her usual plenty, the
whole multitude will be affected by it; a disease may take place, and
sweep off a far greater number than that proportioned to the deficiency
of the season. What results from this? That those who have escaped,
finding food more plentiful, become vigorous and strong; generation
gives life to additional numbers, food preserves it, until they rise up
to the former standard.
Thus the generative faculty resembles a spring loaded with a weight,
which always exerts itself in proportion to the diminution of
resistance: when food has remained some time without augmentation or
diminution, generation will carry numbers as high as possible; if then
food come to be diminished, the spring is overpowered; the force of it
becomes less than nothing. Inhabitants will diminish, at least, in
proportion to the overcharge. If upon the other hand, food be increased,
the spring which stood at 0, will begin to exert itself in proportion as
the resistance diminishes; people will begin to be better fed; they will
multiply, and in proportion as they increase in numbers, the food will
become scarce again.
I must here subjoin a remark very analogous to this subject. That the
generative faculty in man (which we have compared to a spring) and the
care and love we have for our children, first prompt us to multiply, and
then engage us to divide what we have with our little ones. Thus from
dividing and subdividing it happens, that in every country where food is
limited to a certain quantity, the inhabitants must be subsisted in a
regular progression, descending down from plenty and ample subsistence,
to the last periods of want, and even sometimes starving for hunger.
Although the examples of this last extremity are not common in some
countries, yet I believe they are more so than is generally imagined;
and the other stages of want are productive of many diseases, and of a
decay which extinguishes the faculty of generation, or which weakens it,
so as to produce children less vigorous and less healthy. I appeal to
experience, if this reasoning be not just.
Put two or three pairs of rabbits into a field proper for them, the
multiplication will be rapid; and in a few years the warren will be
stocked: you may take yearly from it a hundred pairs, I shall suppose,
and keep your warren in good order: give over taking any for some years,
you will perhaps find your original stock rather diminished than
increased, for the reasons above mentioned. Africa yearly furnishes many
thousands for the cultivation of America; in this she resembles the
warren. I have little doubt but that if all her sons were returned to
her, by far the greater part would die of hunger.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAP. IV.
_Continuation of the same Subject, with regard to the natural and
immediate effects of Agriculture, as to Population._
I proceed in my examination. I now suppose man to add his labour and
industry to the natural activity of the soil: in so far, as by this he
produces an additional quantity of food, in so far he lays a foundation
for the maintenance of an additional number. This number I shall call
(B). From this I conclude, that as (A) is in a constant proportion to
the spontaneous fruits, so (B) must be in proportion to agriculture (by
this term I understand at present every method of augmenting food by
labour) consequently the number maintained by the labour of mankind must
be to the whole number of mankind as (B) is to (A + B), or as (B) is to
(A) and (B) jointly.
By this operation we find mankind immediately divided into two classes;
those who, without working, live upon the spontaneous fruits of the
earth; that is, upon milk, cattle, hunting, &c. The other part, those
who are obliged to labour the soil. It is proper next to inquire what
should naturally oblige a man to labour; and what are the natural
consequences of it as to multiplication.
We have already said, that the principle of generation is inherent in
man, and prompts him to multiply. Another principle, as naturally
inherent in the mind, as the first is in the body, is self-love, or a
desire of ease and happiness, which prompts those who find in themselves
any superiority; whether personal, or political, to make use of every
natural advantage. Consequently, such will multiply proportionably:
because by appropriating to themselves the fruits of the earth, they
have the means of subsisting their offspring. The others, I think, will
very naturally become their servants; as this method is of all others
the most easy to procure subsistence. This is so analogous to the nature
of man, that we see every where, even among children, that the smallest
superiority in any one over the rest, constantly draws along with it a
tribute of service in one way or other. Those who become servants for
the sake of food, will soon become slaves: for slavery is but the abuse
of service, established by a civil institution; and men who find no
possibility of subsisting otherwise, will be obliged to serve upon the
conditions prescribed to them.
This seems a consequence not unnatural in the infancy of the world: yet
I do not pretend to affirm that this was the origin of slavery.
Servants, however, there have always been; and the abuse of service is
what we understand by slavery. The subordination of children to their
parents, and of servants to their masters, seems to be the most rational
origin of society and government. The first of these is natural, and
follows as the unavoidable consequence of an entire dependence: the
second is political, and may very naturally take place as to those who
cannot otherwise procure subsistence. This last species of subordination
may, I think, have taken place, the moment man became obliged to labour
for subsistence, but no sooner.
The wants of man are not confined to food, merely. When food is to be
produced from the rude surface of the earth, a great part of his time
must be taken up with this object, even supposing him to be provided
with every utensil proper for the exercise of his industry: he must
therefore be in a worse condition to provide for his other wants:
consequently, he may be willing to serve any one who will do it for him.
Whereas on the other hand, if we suppose all mankind idle and fed,
living upon the spontaneous fruits of the earth, the plan of universal
liberty becomes quite natural: because under such circumstances they
find no inducement to come under a voluntary subordination.
Let us now borrow the idea of a primitive society, of a government, of a
king, from the most antient history we have, the better to point out the
effects of agriculture and multiplication. The society is the whole
taken together; it is Jacob, his sons, their wives, their children, and
all the servants. The government regards the institutions prescribed by
Jacob, to every one of the family, concerning their respective
subordination and duty. Multiplication will here go forward, not in
proportion to the generative faculty, but according to the employment of
the persons already generated. If Jacob continue pasturing his herds, he
must extend the limits of his right of pasture; he must multiply his
stock of cattle, in proportion as the mouths of his family augment. He
is charged with all this detail: for he is master, and director, and
statesman, and general provider. His servants will work as they are
ordered; but if he has not had the proper foresight, to break up lands
so soon as his family comes nearly up to that proportion which his
flocks can easily feed; if in this case, a dry season should burn up the
grass in Palestine, he will be obliged to send some of his stock of
cattle, with some of his family, to market, there to be sold; and with
the price he must buy corn. For in this early age, there was money,
there were manufacturers of sackcloth, of common rayment, and of
party-coloured garments; there was a trade in corn, in spicery, balm,
and myrrh. Jacob and his family were shepherds, but they lived not
entirely on flesh; they eat bread: consequently there was tillage in
those days, though they exercised none. The famine however was ready to
destroy them, and probably would have done it, but for the providential
circumstance of Joseph’s being governor of Egypt. He relieved their
distress, he gave to his family the best country in the whole kingdom
for pasture; and they had a gratuitous supply of bread.
No doubt, so long as these favourable circumstances subsisted,
multiplication would go on apace. What supernatural assistance God was
pleased to grant for the increase of his chosen people, does not concern
my inquiry.
I have mentioned transiently this example of the patriarch, only to
point out how antient the use of money, the invention of trade and
manufactures appear to have been. Without such previous establishments,
I consider mankind as savages, living on the spontaneous fruits of the
earth, as in the first supposition; and confined, as to numbers, to the
actual extent of these productions.
From what has been said, we may conclude, that the numbers of mankind
must depend upon the quantity of food produced by the earth for their
nourishment; from which, as a corollary, may be drawn,
That mankind have been, as to numbers, and must ever be, in proportion
to the food produced; and that the food produced will be in the compound
proportion of the fertility of the climate, and the industry of the
inhabitants.
From this last proposition it appears plain, that there can be no
general rule for determining the number of inhabitants necessary for
agriculture, not even in the same country. The fertility of the soil
when laboured; the ease of labouring it; the quantity of good
spontaneous fruits; the plenty of fish in the rivers and sea; the
abundance of wild birds and beasts; have in all ages, and ever must
influence greatly the nourishment, and, consequently, regulate the
multiplication of man, and determine his employment.
To make an establishment in a country not before inhabited, to root out
woods, destroy wild and venomous animals, drain marshy grounds, give a
free course to water, and to lay down the surface into corn fields, must
surely require more hands than to cultivate the same after it is
improved. For the truth of this, I appeal to our American brethren.
We may therefore conclude, that the most essential requisite for
population, is that of agriculture, or the providing of subsistence.
Upon this all the rest depends: while subsistence is upon a precarious
footing, no statesman can turn his attention to any thing else.
The great importance of this object has engaged some to imagine, that
the luxurious arts, in our days, are prejudicial both to agriculture and
multiplication. It is sometimes a loss to fix one’s attention too much
upon any one object, however important. No body can dispute that
agriculture is the foundation of multiplication, and the most essential
requisite for the prosperity of a state. But it does not follow from
this, that almost every body in the state should be employed in it; that
would be inverting the order of things, and turning the servant into the
master. The duty and business of man is not to feed; he is fed, in order
to do his duty, and to become useful.
It is not sufficient for my purpose to know, that the introduction of
agriculture, by multiplying the quantity of the earth’s productions,
does evidently tend to increase the numbers of mankind. I must examine
the _political causes_ which must concur, in order to operate this
effect.
For this purpose, my next inquiry shall be directed towards discovering
the true principles which influence the employment of man, with respect
to agriculture. I shall spare no pains in examining this point to the
bottom, even though it should lead me to anticipate some branches of my
subject.
I shall endeavour to lay down principles consistent with the nature of
man, with agriculture, and with multiplication, in order, by their
means, to discover both the use and abuse of the two last. When these
parts are well understood, the rest will go on more smoothly, and I
shall find the less occasion to interrupt my subject, in order to
explain the topics upon which the whole depends.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAP. V.
_In what Manner, and according to what Principles, and_ political
Causes, _does Agriculture augment Population_?
I have already shewn, how the spontaneous fruits of the earth provide a
fund of nourishment for a determined number of men, and I have slightly
touched upon the consequences of adding labour to the natural activity
of the soil.
Let me now carry this inquiry a little farther. Let me suppose a country
fertile in spontaneous productions, capable of improvements of every
kind, inhabited by a people living under a free government, and in the
most refined simplicity, without trade, without the luxurious arts, and
without ambition. Let me here suppose a statesman, who shall inspire a
taste for agriculture and for labour into those who formerly consumed
the spontaneous fruits of the earth in ease and idleness. What will
become of this augmentation of food produced by this additional labour?
The sudden increase of food, such as that here supposed, will
immediately diffuse vigour into all; and if the additional quantity be
not very great, no superfluity will be found. No sooner will the
inhabitants be fully nourished, but they will begin to multiply a-new;
then they will come to divide with their children, and food will become
scarce again.
Thus much is necessary for the illustration of one principle; but the
effects, which we have been pointing out, will not be produced barely by
engaging those who lived by hunting (I suppose) to quit that trade, and
turn farmers. The statesman must also find out a method to make the
produce of this new branch of industry circulate downwards, so as to
relieve the wants of the most necessitous. Otherwise, the plenty
produced, remaining in the hands of those who produced it, will become
to them an absolute superfluity; which, had they any trade with a
neighbouring state, they would sell, or exchange, and leave their fellow
citizens to starve. And as we suppose no trade at all, this superfluity
will perish like their cherries, in a year of plenty; and consequently
the farmers will immediately give over working.
If, to prevent this inconveniency, the statesman forces certain classes
to labour the soil, and, with discretion, distributes the produce of it
to all that have occasion for subsistence, taking in return their
services for the public benefit; this will prove an infallible way of
multiplying inhabitants, of making them laborious, and of preserving a
simplicity of manners; but it is also the picture of antient slavery,
and is therefore excluded from the supposition.
If he acts consistently with that spirit of liberty, which we have
supposed to animate his subjects, he has no method left, but to contrive
different employments for the hands of the necessitous, that, by their
labour, they may produce an equivalent which may be acceptable to the
farmers, in lieu of this superfluity; for these last will certainly not
raise it, if they cannot dispose of it; nor will they dispose of it, but
for a proper equivalent. This is the only method (in a free state) of
procuring additional food, and of distributing it through the society,
as the price of those hours which before were spent in idleness: and, as
this will prove a more certain and more extensive fund of subsistence,
than the precarious productions of spontaneous fruits, which cannot be
increased at discretion, and in proportion to demand, it will greatly
increase numbers; but, on the other hand, it must evidently destroy that
simplicity of manners which naturally reigns among nations who do not
labour.
A people, therefore, who have an industrious turn, will multiply in
proportion to the superfluity of their farmers; because the labour of
the necessitous will prove an equivalent for it.
Now this additional number of inhabitants being raised and fed with the
superfluity _actually_ produced by the farmers, can never be supposed
necessary for providing that quantity, which (though relatively to the
farmers it be called a superfluity) is only a sufficiency relatively to
the whole society; and, therefore, if it be found necessary to employ
the new inhabitants also in farming, it must only be with a view to a
still greater multiplication.
Farther, we may lay it down as a principle, that a farmer will not
labour to produce a superfluity of grain relatively to his own
consumption, unless he finds some want which may be supplied by means of
that superfluity; neither will other industrious persons work to supply
the wants of the farmer for any other reason than to procure
subsistence, which they cannot otherwise so easily obtain. These are the
reciprocal wants which the statesman must create, in order to bind the
society together. Here then is one principle: _Agriculture among a free
people will augment population, only in proportion as the necessitous
are put in a situation to purchase subsistence with their labour_. I
proceed.
If in any country which actually produces nourishment for its
inhabitants, according to the progression above-mentioned, (p. 27.) a
plan is set on foot for the extension of agriculture; the augmentation
must be made to bear a due proportion to the progress of industry and
wants of the people, or else an outlet must be provided for disposing of
the superfluity. And if, at setting out, a foreign consumption cannot be
procured for the produce of husbandry, the greatest caution must be had
to keep the improvement of the soil within proper bounds: for, without
this, the plan intended for an improvement will, by over-doing, turn out
to the detriment of agriculture. This will be the case, if the fruits of
the earth be made to increase faster than the numbers and the industry
of those who are to consume them. For if the whole be not consumed, the
regorging plenty will discourage the industry of the farmer.
But if, together with an encouragement to agriculture, a proper outlet
be found for the superfluity, until the numbers and industry of the
people, by increasing, shall augment the home-consumption, which again
by degrees will diminish the quantity of exportation, then the spring
will easily overcome the resistance; it will dilate; that is, numbers
will continue to increase.
From this may be derived another principle: _That agriculture, when
encouraged for the sake of multiplying inhabitants, must keep pace with
the progress of industry; or an out-let must be provided for all
superfluity_.
In the foregoing example, I have supposed no exportation, the more to
simplify the supposition: I was, therefore, obliged to throw in a
circumstance, in order to supply the want of it; to wit, an augmentation
of inland demand from the suspension of hunting; and I have supposed
those who formerly supported themselves by this, to consume the
superfluous food of the farmers for the price of their labour. This may
do well enough as a supposition, and has been made use of only to
explain principles; but the manners of a people are not so easily
changed; and therefore I have anticipated a little the supposition of
trade, only to shew how it must concur with industry, in the advancement
of agriculture and multiplication.
Let me next consider the consequences of an augmentation of agriculture
in a country where the inhabitants are lazy; or where they live in such
simplicity of manners, as to have few wants which labour and industry
can supply. In this case, I say, the scheme of agriculture will not
succeed; and, if set on foot, part of the grounds will soon become
uncultivated again.
The laziest part of the farmers, disgusted with a labour which produces
a plenty superfluous to themselves, which they cannot dispose of for any
equivalent, will give over working, and return to their antient
simplicity. The more laborious will not furnish food to the necessitous
for nothing: such therefore who cannot otherwise subsist, will naturally
serve the industrious, and thereby sell their service for food. Thus by
the diminution of labour, a part of the country, proportional to the
quantity of food which the farmers formerly found superfluous, will
again become uncultivated.
Here then will be found a country, the population of which must stop for
want of food; and which, by the supposition, is abundantly able to
produce more. Experience every where shews the possible existence of
such a case, since no country in Europe is cultivated to the utmost; and
that there are many still, where cultivation, and consequently
multiplication, is at a stop. These nations I consider as in a _moral
incapacity_ of multiplying: the incapacity would be _physical_, if there
was an actual impossibility of their procuring an augmentation of food
by any means whatsoever.
These principles seem to be confirmed by experience, whether we compare
them with the manner of living among the free American savages, or among
the free, industrious, and laborious Europeans. We find the productions
of all countries, generally speaking, in proportion to the number of
their inhabitants; and, on the other hand, the inhabitants are most
commonly in proportion to the food.
I beg that this may not be looked upon as a quibble, or what is called a
vicious circle. I have qualified the general proposition by subjoining
that it is found true most commonly; and from what is to follow, we
shall better discover both the truth and meaning of what is here
advanced. While certain causes operate, food will augment, and mankind
will increase in proportion; when these causes cease, _procreation_ will
not augment numbers; then the general proposition will take place;
numbers and food will remain the same, and balance one another. This I
imagine to be so in fact; and I hope to shew that it is rational also.
Let me now put an end to this chapter, by drawing some conclusions from
what has been laid down, in order to enlarge our ideas, and to enable us
to extend our plan.
I. One consequence of a fruitful soil, possessed by a free people, given
to agriculture, and inclined to industry, will be the production of a
superfluous quantity of food, over and above what is necessary to feed
the farmers. Inhabitants will multiply; and according to their increase,
a certain number of the whole, proportional to such superfluity of
nourishment produced, will apply themselves to industry and to the
supplying of other wants.
II. From this operation produced by industry, we find the people
distributed into two classes. The first is that of the farmers who
produce the subsistence, and who are necessarily employed in this branch
of business; the other I shall call _free hands_; because their
occupation being to procure themselves subsistence out of the
superfluity of the farmers, and by a labour adapted to the wants of the
society, may vary according to these wants, and these again according to
the spirit of the times.
III. If in the country we are treating of, both money and the luxurious
arts are supposed unknown, then the superfluity of the farmers will be
in proportion to the number of those whose labour will be found
sufficient to provide for all the other necessities of the inhabitants;
and so soon as this is accomplished, the consumption and produce
becoming equally balanced, the inhabitants will increase no more, or at
least very precariously, unless their wants be multiplied.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAP. VI.
_How the Wants of Mankind promote their Multiplication._
If the country we were treating of in the former chapter be supposed of
a considerable extent and fruitfulness, and if the inhabitants have a
turn for industry; in a short time, _luxury_ and the use of _money_ (or
of something participating of the nature of money) will infallibly be
introduced.
By LUXURY, I understand _the consumption of any thing produced by the
labour or ingenuity of man, which flatters our senses or taste of
living, and which is neither necessary for our being well fed, well
clothed, well defended against the injuries of the weather, nor for
securing us against every thing which can hurt us_[H].
Footnote H:
As my subject is different from that of morals, I have no occasion to
consider the term luxury in any other than a political sense, to wit,
as a principle which produces employment, and gives bread to those who
supply the demands of the rich. For this reason I have chosen the
above definition of it, which conveys no idea, either of abuse,
sensuality, or excess; nor do I, at present, even consider the hurtful
consequences of it as to foreign trade. Principles here are treated of
with regard to mankind in general, and the effects of luxury are only
considered relatively to multiplication and agriculture. Our reasoning
will take a different turn, when we come to examine the separate
interest of nations, and the principles of trade.
I beg therefore, that at present my reasoning be carried no further
(from inductions and suppositions) than my intention is that it should
be. I am no patron, either of vice, profusion, or the dissipation of
private fortunes; although _I may now and then reason very cooly upon
the political consequences of such diseases in a state, when I only
consider the influence they have as to feeding and multiplying a
people_. My subject is too extensive of itself to admit of being
confounded with the doctrine either of morals, or of government,
however closely these may appear connected with it; and did I not
begin by simplifying ideas as much as possible, and by banishing
combinations, I should quickly lose my way, and involve myself in
perplexities inextricable.
By MONEY, I understand _any commodity, which purely in itself is of no
material use to man for the purposes above-mentioned, but which acquires
such an estimation from his opinion of it, as to become the universal
measure of what is called value, and an adequate equivalent for any
thing alienable_.
Here a new scene opens. This money must be found in the hands of some of
the inhabitants; naturally, of such as have had the wit to invent it,
and the address to make their countrymen fond of it, by representing it
as an equivalent value for food and necessaries; that is to say, the
means of procuring, without work or toil, not only the labour of others,
but food itself.
Here then is produced a new object of want. Every person becomes fond of
having money; but how to get it is the question. The proprietors will
not give it for nothing, and by our former supposition every one within
the society was understood to be abundantly supplied with food and
necessaries; the farmers, from their labouring the ground; the free
hands, by the return of their own ingenuity, in furnishing necessaries.
The proprietors therefore of this money have all their wants supplied,
and still are possessors of this new kind of riches, which we now
suppose to be coveted by all.
The natural consequence here will be, that those who have the money will
cease to labour, and yet will consume; and they will not consume for
nothing, for they will pay with money.
Here then is a number of inhabitants, who live and consume the produce
of the earth without labouring: food will soon become scarce; demand for
it will rise, and that will be paid with money; this is the best
equivalent of all; many will run to the plough; the superfluity of the
farmers will augment; the rich will call for superfluities; the free
hands will supply them, and demand food in their turn. These will not be
found a burden on the husbandmen, as formerly; the rich, who hired of
them their labour or service, must pay them with money, and this money
in their hands will serve as an equivalent for the superfluity of
nourishment produced by additional agriculture.
When once this imaginary wealth, money, becomes well introduced into a
country, luxury will very naturally follow; and when money becomes the
object of our wants, mankind become industrious, in turning their labour
towards every object which may engage the rich to part with it; and thus
the inhabitants of any country may increase in numbers, until the ground
refuses farther nourishment. The consequences of this will make the
subject of another chapter.
Before we proceed, something must be said, in order to restrain these
general assertions a little.
We have supposed a very rapid progress of industry, and a very sudden
augmentation of inhabitants, from the introduction of money. But it must
be observed, that many circumstances have concurred with the money, to
produce this effect.
We have supposed a country capable of improvement, a laborious people, a
taste of refinement and luxury in the rich, an ambition to become so,
and an application to labour and ingenuity in the lower classes of men.
According to the greater or less degree of force, or concurrence of
these and like circumstances, will the country in question become more
or less cultivated, and consequently peopled.
If the soil be vastly rich, situated in a warm climate, and naturally
watered, the productions of the earth will be almost spontaneous: this
will make the inhabitants lazy. Laziness is the greatest of all
obstacles to labour and industry. Manufactures will never flourish here.
The rich, with all their money, will not become luxurious with delicacy
and refinement; for I do not mean by luxury the gratification of the
animal appetites, nor the abuse of riches, but _an elegance of taste and
in living, which has for its object the labour and ingenuity of man_;
and as the ingenuity of workmen begets a taste in the rich, so the
allurement of riches kindles an ambition, and encourages an application
to works of ingenuity in the poor.
Riches therefore will here be adored as a god, but not made subservient
to the uses of man; and it is only by the means of swift circulation
from hand to hand, (as shall be observed in its proper place) that they
become productive of the effects mentioned above[I].
Footnote I:
Every transition of money from hand to hand, for a valuable
consideration, implies some service done, something wrought by man, or
performed by his ingenuity, or some consumption of something produced
by his labour. The quicker therefore the circulation of money is in
any country, the more strongly it may be inferred, that the
inhabitants are laborious; and _vice versa_: but of this more
hereafter.
When money does not circulate, it is the same thing as if it did not
exist; and as the treasures found in countries where the inhabitants are
lazy do not circulate, they are rather ornamental than useful.
It is not therefore in the most fruitful countries of the world, nor in
those which are the best calculated for nourishing great multitudes,
that we find the most inhabitants. It is in climates less favoured by
nature, and where the soil only produces to those who labour, and in
proportion to the industry of every one, where we may expect to find
great multitudes; and even these will be found greater or less, in
proportion as the turn of the inhabitants is directed to ingenuity and
industry.
In such countries where these are made to flourish, the free hands (of
whom we have spoken above) will be employed in useful manufactures,
which, being refined upon by the ingenious, will determine what is
called the standard of taste; this taste will increase consumption,
which again will multiply workmen, and these will encourage the
production of food for their nourishment.
Let it therefore never be said, that there are too many manufacturers
employed in a country; it is the same as if it were said, there are too
few idle persons, too few beggars, and too many husbandmen.
We have more than once endeavoured to shew, that these manufacturers
never can be fed but out of the superfluity of nourishment produced by
the farmers. It is a contradiction, I think, to say, that those who are
fed upon the surplus of those who cultivate the soil are necessary for
producing a sufficiency to themselves. For if even this surplus were to
diminish, the manufactures, not the labourers, would be the first to be
extinguished for want of nourishment.
The importance of the distributive proportion of mankind into labourers
and free hands appears so great, and has so intimate a connection with
this subject, that it engages me to seek for an illustration of the
principles I have been laying down, in an example drawn from facts, as
it is found to stand in one of the greatest and most flourishing nations
in Europe. But before I proceed farther in this part of my subject, I
must examine the consequences of slavery with regard to the subject we
are now upon. Relations here are so many and so various, that it is
necessary to have sometimes recourse to transitions, of which I give
notice to my reader, that he may not lose the connection.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAP. VII.
_The Effects of Slavery upon the Multiplication and Employment of
Mankind._
Before I go on to follow the consequences of the above reasoning, I must
stop, to consider a difference, of no small importance, between antient
and modern times, which will serve to illustrate the nature of slavery,
with regard to population and the employment of mankind.
We have endeavoured to lay down the principles which seem to influence
these two objects, supposing all to be free. In that case I imagine the
human species will multiply pretty much in proportion to their industry;
their industry will increase according to their wants, and these again
will be diversified according to the spirit of the times.
From this I conclude, that the more free and simple the manners of a
country are, _cæteris paribus_, the fewer inhabitants will be found in
it. This is proved by experience every where. The Tartars, who freely
wander up and down a country of vast extent, multiply but little; the
savages in America, who live upon hunting, in a state of great
independence; the inhabitants of several mountainous countries in
Europe, where there are few manufactures, and where the inhabitants do
not leave the country; in all such places mankind do not multiply. What
is the reason of this? One would imagine, where there is a great extent
of ground capable of producing food, that mankind should multiply until
the soil refused to give more. I imagine the answer may be easily
discovered from the principles above laid down.
Where mankind have few wants, the number of free hands necessary to
supply them is very small, consequently very little surplus from the
farmers is sufficient to maintain them. When therefore it happens, that
any poor family in the class of free hands is very numerous, division
there comes to be carried to its utmost extent, and the greatest part
become quite idle, because there is no demand for their work. As long as
they can be fed by the division of the emoluments arising from the
labour of their parents, or by the charity of others, they live; when
these resources fail, they become miserable. In so wretched a situation
it is not easy to find bread. The farmers will not double their
diligence from a charitable disposition. Those who have land will not
allow those indigent people a liberty to raise grain in it for nothing;
and although they should, the poor are not in a capacity to provide what
is necessary for doing it. All other work is fully stocked, the wretched
die, or extinguish without multiplying.
To make this more evident, let us suppose the wants of mankind, in any
polite nation of Europe, which lives and flourishes in our days upon the
produce of its own soil, reduced all at once to the simplicity of the
antient patriarchs, or even to that of the old Romans. Suppose all the
hands now employed in the luxurious arts, and in every branch of modern
manufactures, to become quite idle, how could they be subsisted? What
oeconomy could be set on foot able to preserve so many lives useful to
the state? Yet it is plain by the supposition, that the farmers of the
country are capable of maintaining them, since they do so actually. It
would be absurd to propose to employ them in agriculture, seeing there
are enough employed in this, to provide food for the whole.
If it be certain, that such people would die for want without any
resource, must it not follow, that unless their parents had found the
means of maintaining them when children, and they themselves the means
of subsisting by their industry in supplying wants, they could not have
existed beyond their first infancy.
This seems to strike deep against the populousness of the old world,
where we know that the wants of mankind, with regard to trades and
manufactures, were so few.
But in those days the wants of mankind were of a different nature. At
present there is a demand for the ingenuity of man; then there was a
demand for his person and service. Now provided there be a demand for
man, whatever use he be put to, the species will multiply; for those who
stand in need of them will always feed them, and as long as food is to
be found, numbers will increase.
In the present times food cannot, in general, be found, but by labour,
and that cannot be found but to supply wants. Nobody will feed a free
man, more than he will feed the wild birds or beasts of the field,
unless he has occasion for the labour of the one or the flesh of the
other.
In the old world the principles were the same, but the spirit of nations
was different. Princes wanted to have numerous armies. Free states
sought for power in the number of their citizens. The wants of mankind
being few, and a simplicity of manners established, to have encouraged
industry, excepting in agriculture, which in all ages has been the
foundation of population, would have been an inconsistency. To make
mankind labour beyond their wants, to make one part of a state work to
maintain the other gratuitously, could only be brought about by slavery,
and slavery was therefore introduced universally. Slavery was then as
necessary towards multiplication, as it would now be destructive of it.
The reason is plain. If mankind be not forced to labour, they will only
labour for themselves; and if they have few wants, there will be little
labour. But when states come to be formed, and have occasion for idle
hands to defend them against the violence of their enemies, food at any
rate must be procured for those who do not labour; and as, by the
supposition, the wants of the labourers are small, a method must be
found to increase their labour above the proportion of their wants.
For this purpose slavery was calculated: it had two excellent effects
with respect to population. The first, that, in unpolished nations,
living upon the spontaneous fruits of the earth, and almost continually
in war, lives were preserved for the sake of making slaves of the
captives. These sold to private people, or different states, were sure
of being fed; whereas remaining in their own country, they only occupied
a place, which, by the force of the generative faculty, as has been
observed, was soon to be filled up by propagation: for it must not be
forgot, that when numbers are swept off, by any sudden calamity, which
does not proportionally diminish subsistence, a new multiplication
immediately takes place. Thus we perceive the hurt done by plagues, by
war, and by other devastations, either among men, or cattle, repaired in
a few years, even in those countries where the standard number of both
is seldom found to increase. What immense quantities of cattle are
yearly slaughtered! Does any body imagine that if all were allowed to
live, numbers would increase in proportion? The same is true of men.
The second advantage of slavery was, that in countries where a good
police prevailed, and where the people had fewer wants by far than are
felt in modern times, the slaves were forced to labour the soil which
fed both them and the idle freemen, as was the case in Sparta; or they
filled all the servile places which freemen fill now, and they were
likewise employed, as in Greece and in Rome, in supplying with
manufactures those whose service was necessary for the state.
Here then was a violent method of making mankind laborious in raising
food; and providing this be accomplished, (by any means whatever)
numbers will increase.
Trade, industry, and manufactures, only tend to multiply the numbers of
men, by encouraging agriculture. If it be therefore supposed, that two
states are equally extended, equally fruitful, and equally cultivated,
and the produce consumed at home, I believe they will be found equally
peopled. But suppose the one laboured by free men, the other by slaves,
what difference will be found in making war? In the first, the free
hands must, by their industry and labour, purchase their food, and a day
lost in labour is in a manner a day of fasting: in the last, the slaves
produce the food, they are first fed, and the rest costs nothing to the
body of free men, who may be all employed in war, without the smallest
prejudice to industry.
From these principles it appears, that slavery in former times had the
same effect in peopling the world that trade and industry have now. Men
were then forced to labour because they were slaves to others; men are
now forced to labour because they are slaves to their own wants.
I only add, that I do not pretend that in fact slavery in antient times
did every where contribute to population, any more than I can affirm
that the spirit of industry in the Dutch is common to all free nations
in our days. All that is necessary for my purpose is, to set forth the
two principles, and to shew the natural effects of the one and the
other, with respect to the multiplication of mankind and advancement of
agriculture, the principal objects of our attention throughout this
book.
I shall at present enlarge no farther upon this matter, but return to
where I left off in the preceeding chapter, and take up the farther
examination of the fundamental distribution of inhabitants into
labourers and free hands.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAP. VIII.
_What Proportion of Inhabitants is necessary for Agriculture, and what
Proportion may be usefully employed in every other Occupation?_
I have proposed this question, not with an intention to answer it fully,
but to point out how, with the proper lights given, it may be answered.
As I write under circumstances not the most favourable for having
recourse to books, I must employ those I have. The article _Political
Arithmetic_, of Mr. Chambers’s Cyclopedia, furnishes me with some
extracts from Sir William Petty, and Dr. Davenant, which I here intend
to employ, towards pointing out a solution of the question proposed.
These authors consider the state of England as it appeared to them, and
what they say is conclusive only with respect to that state.
Sir William Petty supposes the inhabitants of England to be six
millions, the value of grain yearly consumed by them ten millions
sterling, the bushel of wheat reckoned at 5_s._ and that of barley at
2_s._ 6_d._ If we cast the two together, and reckon upon an average,
this will make the quarter, or eight bushels of grain, worth 1_l._
10_s._ but in regard, the barley cannot amount to one half of all the
grain consumed, especially as there is a good quantity of rye made use
of, which is worth more than the barley, though less than the wheat; let
us suppose the grain worth 32_s._ _per_ quarter, at a medium; then ten
millions sterling will purchase six millions of quarters of grain, or
thereabouts: which used for nourishment, in bread and beer, gives the
mean quantity of one quarter, or 512 pounds of grain for every
inhabitant, including the nourishment of his proportional part of
animals; supposing that Sir William attended to this circumstance, for
it is not mentioned by Chambers. And I must observe, by the by, that
this computation may hold good as to England, where people eat so little
bread; but would not answer in France, nor in almost any other country I
have seen.
Dr. Davenant, correcting Sir William’s calculation, makes the
inhabitants 5,545,000. These, according to Sir William’s prices and
proportions, would consume to the amount of 8,872,000_l._ sterling; but
the Dr. carries it, with reason, a little higher, and states it at
9,075,000_l._ sterling; the difference, however, is inconsiderable. From
this he concludes, the gross produce of the corn fields to be about
9,075,000_l._ sterling. I make no criticism upon this computation.
Next, as to the value of other lands; I find Sir William reckons the
gross produce of them in butter, cheese, milk, wool, horses yearly bred,
flesh for food, tallow, hides, hay, and timber, to amount to
12,000,000_l._ sterling: The amount therefore of the gross produce of
all the lands in England must be equal to these two sums added together,
that is to 21,075,000_l._ sterling.
From these data, the Dr. values the yearly rent of corn lands at two
millions sterling, and those of pasture, &c. at seven millions, in all
nine millions.
From this it appears, that the land rents of England are to the gross
produce, as nine is to twenty one, or thereabouts.
Let me now examine some other proportions.
The rents of the corn lands are to the gross produce of them, as two is
to nine; those of pasture, as seven to twelve.
Now it is very certain, that all rents are in a pretty just proportion
to the gross produce, after deducting three principal articles.
1. The nourishment of the farmer, his family and servants.
2. The necessary expences of his family, for manufactures, and
instruments for cultivating the ground.
3. His reasonable profits, according to the custom of every country.
Of these three articles, let us distinguish what part implies the direct
consumption of the pure produce, from what does not.
Of the first sort are the nourishment of men and cattle, wool and flax
for cloathing, firing, and other smaller articles.
Of the second are all manufactures bought, servants wages, the hire of
labourers occasionally, and profits, either spent in luxury, (that is
superfluity) lent, or laid up.
The three articles above mentioned (which we have distributed under two
heads) being deduced from the gross produce, the remaining value shews
the land rent.
This being the case, I am next to examine the cause of the great
disproportion between the rents of corn lands, and those of pasture,
when compared with the gross produce, in order to draw some conclusion,
which may lead to the solution of the question here proposed.
This difference must proceed from the greater proportion of labouring
and other inhabitants employed in consequence of tillage; which makes
the expence of it far greater than that of pasture. And since, in the
one and the other, every article of necessary expence or consumption,
appears to be proportionally equal among those concerned in both, that
is, proportional to the number of labouring inhabitants; it follows,
that the proportion of people employed in agriculture, and upon the
account of it, in different countries, is nearly in the ratio of the
gross produce to the land-rent; or in other words, in the proportion of
the consumption made by the farmers, and by those employed necessarily
by them, to the net produce; which is the same thing.
Now as the consumption upon corn farms is 7⁄9, and that upon pasture
5⁄12, the proportion of these two fractions must mark the ratio between
the populousness of pasture lands, and those in tillage; that is to say,
tillage lands in England were, at that time, peopled in proportion to
pasture lands, as 84 is to 45, or as 28 to 15.
This point being settled, I proceed to another; to wit, the application
of this net produce or surplus of the quantity of food and necessaries
remaining over and above the nourishment, consumption and expence, of
the inhabitants employed in agriculture; and which we have observed
above, to be equal to the land-rents of England, that is to say, to nine
millions yearly.
Must not this of necessity be employed in the nourishment, and for the
use of those whom we have called the _free hands_; who may be employed
in manufactures, trades, or in any way the state pleases.
Now the number of people, I take to be very nearly in the proportion of
the quantity of food they consume; especially when a society is taken
thus, in such accumulative proportion, and when all are found under the
same circumstances as to the plenty of the year.
The whole gross produce of England we have said to be 21,000,000_l._
sterling, of which 9 millions have remained for those not employed in
agriculture; the farmers, therefore, and their attendants, must annually
consume 12 millions; consequently the last class is to the first as 12
is to 9. If therefore, according to Dr. Davenant, there be 5,545,000
people in that kingdom, there must be about 3,168,571 employed or
dependent upon agriculture, and 2,376,429 free hands for every other
occupation. But this proportion of farmers will be found far less, if we
reflect, that we have reckoned for them the total amount of the three
articles above mentioned, that is to say, the total consumption they
make, as well in manufactures, profits upon their labour, &c. as for
food and necessaries; whereas there has been nothing reckoned for the
free hands, but the land-rent: consequently there should be added to the
number of the latter as many as are employed in supplying with all sorts
of manufactures the whole of the farmers of England, and all those who
depend upon them; and this number must be taken from one and added to
the other class.
If this number be supposed to amount to four hundred thousand, it will
do more than cast the balance upon the opposite side.
From these matters of fact (in so far as they are so) we may conclude:
I. That the raising of the rents of lands shews the increase of
industry, as it swells the fund of subsistence consumed by the
industrious; that is, by those who buy it.
II. That it may denote either an increase of inhabitants, or the
depopulation of the land, in order to assemble the superfluous mouths in
villages, towns, &c. where they may exercise their industry with greater
conveniency.
While the land-rents of Europe were very low, numbers of the inhabitants
appeared to be employed in agriculture; but were really no more than
idle consumers of the produce of it. This shall be farther illustrated
in the subsequent chapters.
III. The more a country is in tillage, the _more_ it is inhabited, and
the smaller is the proportion of _free hands_ for all the services of
the state. The more a country is in pasture, the _less_ it is inhabited,
but the greater is the proportion of _free hands_.
I do not pretend, as I have said above, that there is any calculation to
be depended on in this chapter; I have only endeavoured to point out how
a calculation might be made, when the true state of England comes to be
known.
This question not being of a nature to enter into the chain of our
reasoning, may be considered rather as incidental than essential; I have
therefore treated it superficially, and chiefly for the sake of the
conclusions.
Our next inquiry will naturally be into the principles which determine
the residence of inhabitants, in order to discover why, in all
flourishing states, cities are now found to be every where increasing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAP. IX.
_What are the Principles which regulate the Distribution of Inhabitants
into Farms, Villages, Hamlets, Towns, and Cities?_
Having pointed out the natural distribution of inhabitants into the two
capital classes of which we have been treating, I am now going to
examine how far their employment must decide as to their place of
residence.
I. When mankind is fed upon the spontaneous fruits of the earth, the
distribution of their residence depends upon the division of the lands.
If these are in common to all, then the inhabitants will be scattered
abroad, or gathered together, according as the productions of the earth
are equally distributed over the face of the country, or confined to
some fruitful spots.
Hence the Tartars wander with their flocks and feed upon them: hence the
hunting Indians are scattered in small societies, through the woods, and
live upon game: hence others, who feed upon the fruits of the earth, are
collected in greater numbers upon the sides of rivers, and in watered
vallies.
Where therefore the surface of the earth is not appropriated, _there_
the place producing food determines the place of residence of every one
of the society, and _there_ mankind may live in idleness, and remain
free from every constraint.
II. When the earth is not in common to those who live upon her
spontaneous fruits, but appropriated by a few, _there_ either slavery or
industry must be introduced among those who consume the surplus of the
proprietors; because they will expect either service or work in return
for their superfluity. In that case, the residence of the inhabitants
will depend upon the circumstances we are going to consider; and the
object of agriculture (in countries where the surface of the earth is
not broken up, being solely directed towards the gathering in of fruits)
will only determine the residence of these who are necessary for that
purpose: consequently it will follow, that in climates where the earth
produces spontaneously, and in vast abundance, there _may_ be found
large cities; because the number of those who are necessary for
gathering in the fruits, is small in proportion to their quantity;
whereas in other countries, where the earth’s productions are scanty,
and where the climate refuses those of the copious and luxuriant kind,
there will hardly be found any considerable town, as the number of those
who are necessary for collecting the subsistence, bear a great
proportion to the fruits themselves. I do not say, that in the first
case there _must_ be large towns, or that in the other there _can_ be
none; but I say, that in the first case, those who _may_ be gathered
into towns, bear a great proportion to the whole society; and that in
the second, they bear a small one.
I think I have found this principle confirmed by experience. When I
compare the bulk and populousness of the cities of Lombardy, and still
more, those of the watered provinces of Spain, with the inhabitants of
the territory which maintains them, I find the proportion of the first
vastly greater than in those of France and England; and still more again
in these two last mentioned kingdoms, than in the more northern
countries and provinces, where the earth’s productions bear a less
proportion to the labour bestowed in producing them. Now, although I
allow that neither the one or the other to be fed by spontaneous
productions, yet still it may be inferred, that the more the climate
contributes to favour the labour of man, the more the productions
participate of the spontaneous nature[J].
Footnote J:
Hence we may conclude, that in those countries where the people live
upon the spontaneous fruits, the whole society (considered in a
political light) is found composed of free hands. Nature there
supplies the place of the whole class of farmers.
We have said that industry and manufactures are the occupation of the
free hands of a state; consequently, where the proportion of them is
the largest, industry should flourish to the greatest advantage; that
is to say, in countries where the inhabitants live upon the
spontaneous fruits: but that is not the case. Why? Because there is
another circumstance of equal weight which prevents it. These people
are unacquainted with want, and want is the spur to industry. Let this
suffice, in general, as to the distribution of inhabitants in
countries unacquainted with labour.
Again, in countries where labour is required for feeding a society, the
smaller the proportion of labourers, the greater will be that of the
free hands. Fruits which are produced by annual labour, and still more,
such as are the consequence of a thorough cultivation, (such as
luxuriant pasture) give returns far superior to the nourishment of those
employed in the cultivation; consequently, all the surplus is consumed
by people not employed in agriculture; consequently, by those who are
not bound to reside upon the spot which feeds them, and who may choose
the habitation best adapted for the exercise of that industry which is
most proper to produce an equivalent to the farmers for their
superfluities.
From this it is plain that the residence of the farmers only, is
essentially attached to the place of cultivation. Hence, farms in some
provinces, villages in others.
I now proceed to the other class of inhabitants; the free hands who live
upon the surplus of the farmers.
These I must subdivide into two conditions. The first, those to whom
this surplus directly belongs, or who, with a revenue in money already
acquired, can purchase it. The second, those who purchase it with their
daily labour or personal service.
Those of the first condition may live where they please; those of the
second, must live where they can. The residence of the consumers, in
many cases, determines that of the suppliers. In proportion, therefore,
as those who live where they please choose to live together, in that
proportion the others must follow them. And in proportion as the state
thinks fit to place the administration of government in one place, in
that proportion must the administrators, and every one depending upon
them, be gathered together. These I take to be principles which
influence the swelling of the bulk of capitals, and smaller cities.
When the residence of the consumer does not determine that of him who
supplies it, other considerations are allowed to operate. This is the
case in what may properly be called manufactures, distinguished from
trades, whether they be for home consumption, or foreign exportation.
These considerations are,
I. Relative to the place and situation of the establishment, which gives
a preference to the sides of rivers and rivulets, when machines wrought
by water are necessary; to the proximity of forests when fire is
employed; to the place which produces the substance of the manufacture;
as in mines, collieries, brick-works, &c.
II. Relative to the conveniency of transportation, as upon navigable
rivers, or by great roads.
III. Relative to the cheapness of living, consequently not (frequently)
in great cities, except for their own consumption. But it must be
observed, that this last consideration can hardly ever be permanent: for
the very establishment being the means of raising prices, the advantage
must diminish in proportion as the undertaking comes to succeed. The
best rule therefore is, to set down such manufactures upon the banks of
navigable rivers, where all necessary provisions may be brought from a
distance at a small cost. This advantage is permanent, the others are
not; and may prove in time hurtful, by a change in these very
circumstances which decided as to the choice of the situation. From the
establishment of manufactures we see hamlets swell into villages, and
villages into towns.
Sea-ports owe their establishment to foreign trade. From one or other of
these and similar principles, are mankind gathered into hamlets,
villages, towns, and cities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAP. X.
_Of the Consequences which result from the Separation of the two
principal Classes of a People, the Farmers and the Free Hands, with
regard to their Dwelling._
I am next going to examine the consequences resulting to the state, to
the citizens, and to the landed interest, from this kind of separation,
as I may call it, between the parent earth and her laborious children,
which I suppose to take place every where in proportion to the progress
of industry, luxury, and the swift circulation of money.
As to the state, it is, I think, very plain, that, without such a
distribution of inhabitants, it would be impossible to levy taxes. For
as long as the earth nourishes directly those who are upon her surface,
as long as she delivers her fruits into the very hand of him who
consumes them, there is no alienation, no occasion for money,
consequently no possibility of establishing an extensive taxation, as
shall in its place be fully explained, and from this principle is, I
imagine, to be deduced the reason, why we find taxation so little known
under the feudal form of government.
The personal service of the vassals, with their cattle and servants,
upon all occasions made the power and wealth of the lords, and their
rents were mostly paid in kind. They lived upon their lands, were
commonly jealous of one another, and had constant disputes. This was a
very good reason to keep them from coming together. Towns were situated
round their habitations. These were mostly composed of the few tradesmen
and manufacturers that were in the country. The lord’s judge, his
fiscal, and his court of record, added to these numbers; law-suits, and
the lord’s attendance, brought the vassals frequently together; this
gave encouragement to houses of entertainment; and this I take to be the
picture of the greatest part of small towns, if we ascend three or four
hundred years from the present time.
Cities were the residence of bishops. These lords were very independent
of the civil government, and had at the same time the principal
direction in it. They procured privileges to their cities, and these
communities formed themselves by degrees into small republics: taxes
here have ever been familiar. The feudal lords seldom appeared there,
and the inferior classes of the people enjoyed liberty and ease in these
cities only.
In some countries of Europe, as in Germany, the principal citizens, in
time, became patricians. In France certain offices of public trust
sometimes procured nobility to those who bore them, and always
consideration. The representatives of the citizens were even admitted
into the states, and formed the _tiers êtat_. Elsewhere they received
casual marks of distinction from the sovereign, as the Lord Mayor of
London does to this day usually receive knighthood. In short, the only
dawning of public liberty to be met with during the feudal government,
was in the cities; no wonder then if they increased.
Upon the discovery of America and the East-Indies, industry, trade, and
luxury, were soon introduced in the kingdoms of Spain, France, and
England: the grandeur and power of the Hans towns had already pointed
out to sovereigns the importance of those objects.
The courts of princes then became magnificent; the feudal lords
insensibly began to frequent them with more assiduity than formerly. The
splendor of the prince soon eclipsed those rays which shone around them
upon their own lands. They now no more appeared to one another as
objects of jealousy, but of emulation. They became acquainted, began to
relish a court life, and every one proposed to have a house in the
capital. A change of habitation made a change of circumstances, both as
to city and country. As to the city; in so far as inhabitants were
increased, by the addition of the great lords, and of those who followed
their example, demand increased for every sort of provision and labour;
and this quickly drew more inhabitants together. Every one vied with
another in magnificence of palaces, clothes, equipages. Modes changed,
and by turns enlivened the different branches of ingenuity. Whence came
so great a number of inhabitants all of a sudden? He who would have cast
his eyes on the deserted residences of the nobility, would have seen the
old people weeping and wailing, and nothing heard among them but
complaints of desolation: the youth were retired to the city; there was
no change as to them.
This is no doubt a plain consequence of a sudden revolution, which never
can happen without being attended with great inconveniencies. Many of
the numerous attendants of the nobility who uselesly filled every house
and habitation belonging to the great man, were starving for want. He
was at court, and calling aloud for money, a thing he was seldom
accustomed to have occasion for, except to lock up in his chest. In
order to procure this money, he found it expedient to convert a portion
of the personal services of his vassals into cash: by this he lost his
authority. He then looked out for a farmer (not a husbandman) for an
estate which he formerly consumed in its fruits. This undertaker, as I
may call him, began by dismissing idle mouths. Still greater complaints
ensued. At last, the money spent in the city began to flow into the
hands of the industrious: this raised an emulation, and the children of
the miserable, who had felt the sad effects of the revolution, but who
could not foresee the consequences, began to profit by it. They became
easy and independent in the great city, by furnishing to the
extravagance of those under whose dominion they were born.
This progression is perhaps too minutely traced to be exact; I therefore
stop, to consider the situation of affairs at that period, when all the
inconveniences of the sudden revolution had ceased, and when things were
come to the state in which we now find them. Capitals swelled to a great
extent. Paris and London appear monstrous to some, and are said to be a
load upon the rest of the country. This must be examined.
We agree, I suppose, that the inhabitants of cities are not employed in
agriculture, and we may agree that they are fed by it: we have examined
into the causes of the increase of cities, and we have seen the fund
provided for their subsistence, to wit, the surplus of fruits produced
by husbandmen.