acquire the form that adapts them for consumption, by a more frequent repetition or skilful "exertion of the labour that gives them form; so "wealth it might be reasonably inferred, could only be increased through the means by which it " is produced.

،

"But popular prejudice, which has ever regarded "the sum total of individual riches to be synony"mous with public wealth, and which has conceiv"ed every means of increasing the riches of indivi'duals to be a means of increasing public wealth, "has pointed out parsimony or accumulation by a "man's depriving himself of the objects of desire to "which his fortune entitles him, (the usual means of increasing private fortune,) as the most active "means of increasing public wealth.

"When we reflect, that this abstinence from ex

penditure, and consequent accumulation, neither "tends to increase the produce of land, to augment "the exertions of labour, nor to perform a portion of "labour that must otherwise be executed by the hand "of man, it seems that we might be warranted at

once to pronounce that accumulation may be a me"thod of transferring wealth from A, B, and C, to "D; but that it cannot be a method of increasing public wealth, because wealth can only be increased by the same means by which it is produced.

"But when the public prejudice is confirmed by men most admired for talents; when we are told by "the most esteemed authority, that every prodigal "is a public enemy, and every frugal man a public "benefactor; that parsimony, and not industry, in

creases capital (meaning wealth); and that, as frugality increases, and prodigality diminishes, the public capital; so the conduct of those whose expence just equals their revenue, neither increases nor diminishes it; it becomes necessary to enter "into a more minute examination of this opinion, "and the more so, as it has given birth to an erroneous system of legislation which, if persisted in, must infallibly ruin the country that adopts or perseveres in it.

66

66

“If capital, in all its varieties, is neither more nor less than a part of the produce of the earth, or σε a part of the earth itself, to which either nature or art has given a form that adapts it for supplanting or performing a portion of labour; let us consider "whether there are not bounds to the quantity of "its revenue, which a country can, consistently with "its welfare, bestow in this sort of expenditure, that "is appropriate to the execution of this duty.

"For the sake of perspicuity, we shall begin by "considering the effects of accumulation in a simple "state of society, where capital has not yet assumed "all that variety of form, which man, in the progress "of society, gives it, for the purpose of performing "labour; though the same observations will after"wards be found applicable to societies such as "modern Europe presents to our view, where capital

floats in all the variety of channels to which ex"tended commerce destines it, and where even the "natural channels, in which all property - would "fluctuate, are deranged by overgrown finanicial arrangements.

"When society exists in that state where man is "chiefly occupied in agriculture, his property can

only consist in the land he possesses, in the grain "he produces annually, in the breeding stock "whose produce is reared for consumption, and,

lastly, in the animals and utensils he employs to "enable him to produce and consume his wealth with "less labour; that is, in a more satisfactory and com"fortable manner to himself. In such a state, therefore, his property divides itself into three different "branches.

66 1. The land he cultivates.

"2. The stock he reserves for immediate and remote "consumption.

"3. His capital, consisting of the animals or "machines he employs to save labour in the cultiva"tion of his farm, or in the convenient consumption "of its produce.

"That this last part of his wealth is highly bene"ficial to himself, as well as to the society in which "he lives, is undoubted; it saves a portion of labour "which must otherwise be executed by the hand of

man, and may even execute a portion of labour "beyond the reach of the personal exertions of man

to accomplish. If, therefore, he is not possessed of "a sufficiency of those animals, instruments, and "machines, which form his capital, it will most

clearly be commendable and in the highest degree advantageous to society, that he should augment "the exertions of his industry, for the purpose of procuring them; and if he cannot otherwise effect "this augmentation, it may even be prudent and

"beneficial that he should abridge a portion of his "immediate consumption for the sake of increasing "his capital; that is, that he should allot a part of "the live-stock and grain he otherwise would immediately consume and enjoy, to purchase what would enable him, at a future period, to produce and consume more with greater ease and satisfaction to " himself.

66

،

66

If, however, on the other hand, he is already in possession of as much capital, as, in the existing state of his knowledge, he can use for the purpose "of saving labour in cultivating the quantity of land "he possesses, it can neither be advantageous for "himself nor for the public, that he should abridge "his consumption of food, clothing, and the other objects of his desire, for the purpose of accumu», lating a much greater quantity of capital than can "by possibility be employed in abridging labour. "The extension of his lands or the invention of new

66

means of supplanting labour would justify a desire "for increasing his capital: but, otherwise, accumu"lation by deprivation of expenditure must be detri"mental to himself as well as to the public.

66

To the farmer it must be disadvantageous, because he deprives himself and his family of what "they naturally desire, and would otherwise enjoy, "for the purpose of acquiring either a larger quantity of labouring cattle than he could usefully em

66

ploy, or of accumulating a hoard of spades, ploughs, "and other utensils of husbandry, infinitely greater "than he could use.

"To the public it is still more disadvantageous,

"because it diverts the channel of its industry from "a path in which it must be useful, to a path in "which, unless there is either an acquisition of ter"ritory, or a discovery of new means of supplanting "or performing labour by capital, it is useless to "mankind.

"But further, to display the full extent of the evil "that must arise from indulging this baneful passion "for accumulation, that has been falsely denominated a virtue, it is necessary here to explain the singu"lar effect which the demand it creates must have "on individual riches.

"It has already been made evident, that a sudden "demand for any consumable commodity, by increa"sing its value, encourages an augmented produc"tion, and tends therefore to increase wealth, though "its effect is always counteracted by the more important diminution of the value of other commo"dities, (from which the sudden rise of the value of any one commodity abstracts a portion of demand ;) "because the check given to production, by the "abstraction of demand, has a more powerful effect "in diminishing wealth, than the encouragement arising from an extension of demand has in augmenting it.

66

“Thus à diminution of value must be produced

not only in the articles for which parsimony occa"sions an abstraction of demand, but even in the "article for which it creates a demand; and public "wealth must severely feel the effects of the discouragement by this means given to the produc❝tion of both.