during its whole continuance, and might equally well have been employed as not during that whole time? How then can it be that capital is the cause of employment, and that a slackness of work is to be ascribed to a want of capital, when, with an abundance of every requisite kind of capital, the workmen are standing still? It is plain that the want of employment must proceed from some other cause.

Again, we have observed already, that labour bestowed upon natural products is the only source of wealth. When labour has been bestowed upon natural products, they become articles of wealth and capital: but they were not such until labour was bestowed upon them. Consequently, it is labour that creates capital. It is not possible, then, that a want of employment can be the result of a want of capital, when it is labour alone that originally created capital, and has been the source of every subsequent addition to it. If such were the case, the remedy for a want of work would be nothing more than a farther exertion of labour.

But if a want of work does not proceed from a want of capital, the causes must be sought for elsewhere; and therefore we proceed to the inquiry—what are the causes of employment, or of a scarcity of employment?

The ability to labour, and the possession of tools and materials, or land, whereon to labour, are of themselves sufficient to afford fullest occupation to him who is willing to work. Nothing more than these are necessary. That which spurs men on to labour, must, no doubt, be the never-ending cravings of their wants and wishes. But that which occasions a want of employment, cannot be the absence of these cravings, because they always exist and operate. Notwithstanding the high degree of efficiency to which labour has already attained, human wants and wishes are far from being satisfied. On every hand we are still surrounded with poverty and misery, and when real wants are supplied, artificial ones immediately arise actually more numerous, and scarcely less clamorous. Yet with demands for labour greater than the utmost powers of humanity could ever satisfy, the labourer is still without full employment. This apparently contradictory state of things must be accounted for, either from an inability to satisfy our cravings by means of labour; or an inability to do so at a sacrifice of less labour than is esteemed equivalent to the value of the indulgence of the cravings themselves: in other words, the cravings cannot be indulged

except at a cost of more than the indulgence is worth. Here are two opposite motives -the indulgence on one hand, and the sacrifice of acquiring it on the other: the excess of the former over the latter constitutes the motive to exertion.

Now a constant and effective demand for labour would be produced by the combi. nation of these circumstances.-First, that the labourers be sufficiently skilled in the various occupations, the produce of which is called for in the existing state of things. Secondly, that there exist a distribution of the labourers in the several occupations proportioned to the call there is for the respective articles, the produce of these occupations. Thirdly, that no higher prices be insisted on than the purchasers are able and willing to give, or than the existing state of the market allows, of taking off the whole quantity of labour of that particular kind. These prices are those which the free and open competition of the market determines; and a consequence of this exact distribution of labour, and of the contentedness to accept such prices, would be, a certain equality in the rate of remuneration of labour in the several occupations, differing only in the different departments, as difference of skill, or other circumstances, really call for higher wages in some than in others. Lastly, that commodities be exempted from unreasonable taxation. These several circumstances existing, a steady and effectual demand for labour will always be found, and industry may exert itself to the full extent of its powers, without apprehension, either that a vent shall be wanting for its produce, or that an inadequate remuneration of labour shall be obtained. But if any one of these circumstances be wanting, the workmen may be expected to be at times without full employment, and industry, in a measure, cramped in its exertion. In remarking

further upon these points, we observe

First, that a want of employment is often to be ascribed to the want of sufficient knowledge or skill in workmen. The full development of the powers of industry essentially depends on the possession of knowledge and skill in the application of labour. If the labourer be rude, or not sufficiently skilled, to produce the articles we require, it is not likely there should be full employment for such unskilful labour. If the great bulk of the people of a country is uninstructed in the arts of life; if they are able only to tend cattle, grow potatoes, construct mud cabins, or weave the coarsest cloth, our want of such things may be soon supplied. When this is done, we have no

farther occasion for labour that can furnish nothing more desirable. All Ireland might be fed, and clothed, and lodged, as her peasantry is fed, and clothed, and lodged with less than the tithe of their labour; and while her peasantry can do nothing better than this, they must continue with but a tithe of their labour in demand, and the rest of their time must unavoidably be spent in idleness. It is this unskilfulness, this ignorance of every art, that is, in every poor and barbarous country, the true cause of a want of employment; from the inability to produce anything desirable, or to produce it with a less sacrifice than the gratification it would yield is worth.

Of this important fact, that it is ignorance which is the great parent of idleness in barbarous or partially civilized countries, we cannot be too fully persuaded. A glance at the different stages in the progress of man, from ignorance and barbarism to civilization and refinement, would sufficiently demonstrate the truth of this position. Contrast the indefatigable industry of an Englishman with the irreclaimable indolence of a savage on the coast of Africa, or an Indian of America. In this last case we have a man who performs every kind of labour for himself, but destitute of the knowledge of every art of civilized life. Here is evidently no mis-direction of labour, and no glut of any one particular sort. The direction of industry to the kind of labour most wanted is complete: the individual changes his occupation from producing one article to producing another, at the moment that his want of the first article is supplied. His want of occupation, then, cannot be the result of industry improperly directed. This man can build his hut, procure his food from the wild fruits and herbs of the woods, or by the chase and fishing; he can make his hunting and fishing weapons and tackle, and form his clothing from the skins of the wild animals he takes. Every thing, however, that he does is in the rudest and most simple fashion: he is unable to add beauty, fineness, or splendour, to any of his works; or, if able, it is only at a sacrifice of toil of an intolerable magnitude. Like the Peruvians at the time of the invasion of the Spaniards, he might, perhaps, be able at the expiration of two years of persevering industry to manufacture a yard of cloth; that is, at a cost of more than it could possibly be worth. The wants of such a man, as far as his abilities can gratify them, or can do so at a reasonable cost, are soon supplied. The first animal he kills, is, in all probability, more than sufficient for his food for the day, perhaps sufficient for several

days. When his stomach is filled, there is nothing more that he can do to gratify his desires: he may wish for better clothing, better lodging, better tools; but those which he has already are the best his skill can furnish. Nothing then remains to be done, but to be idle, or amuse himself in the best way he can: these are his only resort. It is thus with every savage; and how could it be otherwise? His indolence, which is proverbial, is more from force of circumstances than even from habit or disposition: it is these circumstances, in fact, that have produced the habit and disposition. Neither is it from want of appetite, or sufficiently elevated desires, that his indolence proceeds, but from the want of power to gratify them; for his excesses are equally notorious with his indolence, which are sure to be indulged in whenever the indulgence of appetite is within his reach. Thus, it is plain that a want of occupation, and sometimes its consequence, a habit of idleness, is the unavoidable accompaniment of an unskilfulness of labour, and ignorance of the arts of life.

On the other hand, skill, intelligence, and refinement are the inexhaustible sources of activity, and of indefatigable industry, which carry men almost to excess. Take the case of a man highly intelligent, and skilled in the arts which distinguish and adorn civilized life. Let such an individual be placed, like the savage, in circumstances where there can be no superabundance of labour of any particular kind, through an improper direction given to it; this man would not be satisfied with the mere supply of the absolute wants of the stomach, shelter from the weather, or the covering of his limbs; his wants extend farther. He desires food of the choicest kinds; his drink must be, not simple water, but fermented liquors, or spirits. Having skill to produce such things with a moderate degree of exertion, if leisure allow, he busies himself to procure them. His habitation must not be merely a mud hut, a cabin, or cavern of the earth, it must be of larger dimensions, of commodious and tasteful arrangement, constructed with materials neatly put together, beautifully finished, and furnished not only abundantly with articles of use, but of taste and ornament. The same of his dress, his equipage, his attendance. His intelligence brings him in connexion with things unknown and unthought of by the savage; and which, while it gives him new faculties of enjoyment, at the same time gives him new perceptions of wants. The object of his desires multiply; they extend from such as are of a physical to those which are of an intellectual character; the pleasures of

imagination and taste are sought after; he engages in the inquiry and pursuit of knowledge; and labours in arduous and difficult researches of thought, of observation, of reasoning, and experiment. Such a man cannot be indolent. His excited mental activity counteracts the drag of sense and lethargy. The new world of ideas which opens to him, the new views of the relations of things, the astonishing secrets of the physical properties and mechanical powers disclosed to him, present attractions which are more than sufficient to counterbalance the love of ease, or of frivolous or corrupt pleasures. The more his intelligence, the wider is his field of labour; the farther he advances, the more distinctly he perceives how much yet remains to be accomplished, and the clearer he sees the means by which farther progress may be effected. As he the more clearly sees the extent of the field of observation and inquiry, the multiplicity of objects which demand attention, and their nearness to his reach, the greater is the earnestness and ardour of his pursuit. In short, his labours have no end; life itself fails to give space for the accomplishment of the objects for which he wearies himself. Thus it is with knowledge and refinement to give new appetites, larger wants and more elevated desires to be gratified, and skill to pursue and accomplish the objects of our desires; and thus it is that industry is excited to the utmost, and occupation presented to the fullest extent of the powers of humanity.

Again, conceive the individual now supposed to be placed in different circum. stances. Unlike the state of the Indian, let him be placed in a civilized community, in which it shall happen that a superabundance and glut of some particular kinds of labour occur, and that of the kind in which he is occupied, through an application of it to employments unsuited to the demand of the market. Such an individual would still feel but little of the misfortune happening to other persons from a stagnation of business. We have supposed him to be highly skilled in the arts of life, and thus such a man would have it in his power to change the direction of his labour from one occupation to another, as the changing calls of the market should require; and would, consequently, be still able to find full employment in the new channel into which demand should flow.

As, in the infancy of art, a want of occupation is the consequence of the incapacity to furnish objects of superior quality, or to add beauty or fineness to the products of labour; so, in the progress of art, in order to find employment for all the labour of

a community, it is requisite that a higher and higher degree of skill should be acquired, in proportion as labour becomes facilitated and abridged. It is true, one effect of the employment of machinery is to render less manual dexterity and skill, on the part of the workman, necessary.

In general, it requires but little experience or skill to guide and manage a machine. Sometimes that work which, previous to the adoption of a machine, could be executed only by the most skilful hand, is better done with the machine worked by a child. But, on the other hand, as labour becomes facilitated, made more efficient, and supplanted by machinery, it is necessary, in order to find full occupation for the whole quantity of labour, that it become capable of furnishing articles of superior quality, of more elaborate and highly wrought workmanship. Through such progress, purchasers acquire the power of consuming things of superior quality, and workmen of superior skill are in consequence called for. Human desires are insatiable only as regards the quality and variety of articles. As regards their quantity, industry is capable of supplying them to surfeit, with rude and common productions; but we are never unwilling to accept things of superior in lieu of things of inferior quality.

A want of employment cannot proceed from a superabundance of labour of all sorts, whilst there are skill and science to direct it and land, natural productions, or raw materials, whereon to bestow it. There may be too much of some particular sorts of labour; but not of all.

It is, however, a common opinion, that employment depends upon population. "In some countries," says Adam Smith, "labourers multiply so rapidly, that the market is overstocked with labour, and the price falls, from the increased supply." It is true, the density of population, in relation to the quantity of fertile land on which it is to be supported, increases the deduction from the gross produce of industry for rent. Again, the number of labourers in relation to the quantity of capital which is required, and which exists, to render their industry effective, affects the amount of the deduction from its gross produce for profits of capital. But, whilst in these two ways the amount of population affects the wages of labour, and may operate to reduce them, the density of population does not cause an excess of labour, so as to occasion a want of employment: nay, the very contrary the fact. If it were a universal maxim that an increase of workmen occasioned a want of employment, and a reduction of

wages, how is it that, notwithstanding the multiplication of the human species all over the world, employment has still been found for the people? How is it that in England, the population of which has doubled within the last fifty or sixty years, wages have not fallen, but, on the contrary, have doubled or trebled in that interval? They have kept on increasing in North America during a still greater increase of population. They are, perhaps, twice as high in Holland as in Sweden, though the population of Holland is ten times as dense as that of Sweden. If the density of population reduced wages, we should find them lower in the towns than in the country places; while the contrary is universally the fact. A density of population, and multiplication of workmen, so far from lessening employment and lowering wages, contribute to render labour more effective, and to heighten its rewards, by affording the means of effecting a greater division of labour, and by causing an enlargement of the market. Again, the greater effectiveness of the powers of labour, acquired by this greater division, and by a more extended combination of labour, renders works practicable, which before exceeded the powers of man to accomplish; and thus enlarges the field of employment.

The fact is, every additional labourer brings, with the addition of his labour to the common stock, the addition also of his wants. He labours for the supply of none but himself, and consumes the whole produce which his labour creates,-not, perhaps, the identical articles, but their equivalents. Thus he brings to market no more supply than he causes demand. Every shilling that he earns, he spends immediately; and gives as much employment to others to earn it again as was given to him with it.

That there can never be, under the conditions above stated, a superabundance of labour of all sorts, and that the multiplication of workmen does not lessen employment for them, is evident, also, from the fact, that capital performs labour. It is said that capital occasions employment; and yet it is very evident that capital supplants labour: it may unquestionably be said, itself, to perform labour, for it does what comes to the same thing-it augments the working effect of labour. Our labouring cattle and machinery do more work than all our workmen put together could do without them. If, then, capital performs labour, how does it happen that, while it thus increases the supply of labour, and this without adding in a commensu

rate degree to the demand for commodities, that it does not overburden the market with goods, throw the workmen out of employment, and reduce the wages of labour? Notwithstanding that there is more labour brought to market, its effect, so far from lowering wages, is directly the reverse; and every augmentation of capital, by multiplying and cheapening commodities, raises the real reward of labour. This effect, so opposite to what might be expected, can only be accounted for from the fact that skilful labour has the power to open to itself sources of employment, and can never be superabundant, while properly directed, and offered at a reasonable price. From this fact, too, that labour, in such circumstances, cannot exist in superabundance, the other fact 'follows as a consequence that the employment of capital, notwithstanding that it is equivalent to an additional number of workmen, does not lower the wages of labour.

From what has been now said, we are able to judge of the effects of competition amongst workmen. As the multiplication of workmen does not diminish employment, it is plain that competition amongst them cannot deprive them of work. Every description of labour, taken by itself, is exposed to competition in the market, and, as it is liable to be in too great or too small quantities, in relation to the demand for it; so its workmen are liable to be deprived of this kind of occupation, and to have their wages too high or too low in relation to the wages of other workmen. But with labour as a whole it is different. The competition of labourers amongst themselves, though it deprives some of particular occupations, does not diminish employment on the whole, or take away the means of gaining a livelihood by other kinds of labour. Employment is a fund which is inexhaustible, and cannot be lessened by such means. An excess of workmen in any class is not absolute but relative. The workmen of different trades are customers of one another, and the evil would be remedied by increasing the number of those workmen who are its customers. Excessive competition, and its consequence, an unnatural depression of wages, in one kind of labour, is only another name for a want of competition, and an unnatural elevation in other kinds of labour. If the wages of one class are lower than they ought to be, the real remuneration of all those who are its customers, and who thus purchase things at too low a price, are higher than they ought to be. Again, the competition which depresses wages in o

branch, and cheapens its commodities, occasions a saving in the expenditure of the consumers, which is available for an enlarged expenditure elsewhere; and thus the competition raises up an enlarged demand for other commodities, in the measure of the saving and loss of occupation which it at first produces. Thus, the excessive competition which drives a workman out of an employment, at the same time offers work, and a premium, to his engaging in many other employments, in which work is thereby created, and in which wages are relatively too high.

Competition amongst workmen has no tendency to lower the rewards of labour, on the whole. It has no tendency to lessen the produce of labour; on the contrary, its effect is rather to stimulate industry to greater exertions, and multiply commodities. Consequently, industry on the whole, that is, taking into account every class of industry, and including consumers as well as producers, cannot lose, except in those cases where land and capital gain. Every workman sustains a double capacity-of producer and consumer. He consumes as much as he produces, and is as much exposed to injury, or to gain an advantage, in one capacity as in the other. As much as competition amongst the labourers of any one class may, in the exchange of the products of its industry for the products of the industry of others, lower the reward of their particular kind of labour, by so much must the rewards of the labour of those other classes between which the exchange takes place be thereby increased. terms of the exchange between the parties, though of moment to each separate interest, is of none as respects the whole; and hence competition is no hardship or injury to the public.

The

The only hardship of competition is when it acts unequally; when the workmen of one class are severely exposed to its action, while the workmen of other classes are exempted, or affected only in a slight degree. If competition operated equally on every class, the advantage which each member would derive, as a consumer, from the effects of competition amongst the workmen of others, would exactly measure and correspond with the disadvantage he experienced from competition, acting to an equal extent amongst the members of his own class. Each would have to work for the public at nominally low prices; while its members, forming part of the public, each in return would be worked for by all the rest at prices correspondingly low. In such case, the advantage and disadvantage

being equal and reciprocal, the consequences, both to the public, and to indi. viduals, are the same as though no such competition existed. But when one class is compelled, by competition, to work for the other classes at low prices, whilst these others are not obliged to work equally low for it, the disadvantage is all on one side, while all the advantage is on the other, and the suffering so occasioned to that one class may be severe. Its remedy, however, cannot be mistaken. It is, to draw workmen from its own over-numerous class, and with them to extend competition to the others; for the two-fold object of relieving the excess of workmen in their own class, and of cheapening the goods of the other classes which they have to purchase. Such change in the action of competition, although it should happen not to raise the money wages of this class, must, notwithstanding, raise the real reward of its labour, by cheapening the goods on which those wages are expended.

Thus, competition, which men dread as ruinous to trade and industry, is its safeguard. Without it, there would be no check to the impositions and extortions which the self-interest of men, unrestrained, would infallibly practise upon one another. Competition, however, affords them a natural and efficient protection, infinitely more complete than any system of law, or municipal regulation, could secure.

The co-operative system of Mr. Owen, of New Lanark, about which so much stir has been made, and so ineffectually, proceeds on the supposition here contended against-that machinery, and the compe tition amongst workmen, cause a reduction of wages, and throw labourers out of employment. The views which have been now offered are sufficient to take from this system the grounds on which it rests, and to shew that it is impossible that industry, as a whole, can be thus injured.

The cotton manufacture has been often adduced as a striking example of the mis. chievous effects of machinery and competition. No doubt, the circumstances of the work-people in this manufacture have been very seriously deteriorated by the improved machinery, and excessive competition, in it. But has the public gained no benefit from the consequent abundance, excellence, and cheapness of cotton goods? While the injury has fallen on a comparatively few persons, the advantage has been universal, and extended to every other individual in the community. Again, it is of a permanent character, and must extend to all future generations. The capitalist has evi