606 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



capital is given gratis to man by Nature." Most of the precious 

 metals possess a value in excess of the cost of production ; the differ 

 ence represents a portion of capital which does not come from labor, 

 and the value of which is regulated simply by the law of demand and 

 supply. Capital, then, is not always the product of labor, nor does 

 labor, even when accumulated, always produce capital. There is such 

 a thing as destructive labor, as, for instance, under the rule of the Com- 

 mune in Paris. There is also such a thing as unproductive labor, as 

 when thousands of working-men are employed for weeks together in 

 preparations for fetes, illuminations, and the like. An author may 

 spend years in writing a work which no man will read or buy. He 

 surely does not produce capital. Finally, if capital were in reality 

 only labor accumulated, would not the complaint of the socialists be 

 justified when they clamor against society for its iniquity in making 

 the workers non-capitalists, while the capitalists are not workers ? 



It is better to regard capital as the condition of labor, and not its 

 product. As for the origin of capital, to fix it precisely, we need only 

 apply the general formula already given, according to which capital 

 represents the excess of production over consumption. It means sav- 

 ings, therefore, or, if you wish, accumulated savings. One begins to 

 acquire capital, not by labor, but rather by saving the products, whether 

 of labor or of Nature. Hence it follows that a just distribution of capi- 

 tal must be based, not on the amount of labor, but on the amount of 

 saving ; and this is about the state of things existing in the present 

 social order, allowance being made for some imperfections. The spend- 

 thrift wastes his capital ; and he alone produces it, or increases it, who 

 can save. Many persons, who are not at all socialists, discourage sav- 

 ing, and judge it better to expend capital than to consume it. It is 

 true that expenditure in some measure benefits our contemporaries ; 

 yet only at the expense of society in the future ; whereas, saving con- 

 tributes to the future growth of civilization, though doing some little 

 injury to the present generation. Now, shall we sacrifice the present 

 for the future, or shall we compromise the future in order to alleviate 

 the misei-y and suffering of the present ? Let us put an hypothesis 

 which, though impracticable, still may be supposed. Suppose France 

 were to resolve to use up all her wealth in one day. During that one 

 day all Frenchmen might have all sorts of enjoyment. But the morrow ! 



We must remember that the race is in process of development, and 

 is never at any moment what it will be. The present is nothing. To 

 insure progress, the first requisite is that capital should increase. Here 

 is a quantity of grain which might subsist a family for one day : save 

 it, turn it to account, and it will produce food for millions. Such is 

 the benefit of saving, and this is the secret of material civilization, 

 which is itself the result of foresight and of past privations. The na- 

 tions which are at the head of material civilization are those whose 

 institutions have most favored saving, by their respect for private 



