182 Professor Whewell on the 



corn rises in the proportion 1 : 1 +*, the price of goods in the 



proportion 1 :I+'?5 and that wages rise in the proportion 1 : 1 + u. 



Therefore the wages of the labourers employed in producing corn 



become Iw (1 + u) ; and we have by the condition of remunerating 



price, 



pr = lw(\ + y) + ymlw; 



(l+x)pr = lw(l + «)(! + y') + y'mlw; whence 



(l+«)(l+7') + 7 'f» ., . 



1+je=- -9 — — — ; similarly 



l+y+ym J 



1 + ?= 



+ 7 +yi 

 (!+«)(! + 7) +7V 



1 +7+7M 



Now by supposition the labourer's consumption of corn and 

 goods is the same as before; and therefore the expense of corn, 

 which was fw, becomes f(\ +x)w. Similarly the expense in goods, 

 which was (l-f)w, becomes (l—f)(l + %)w: and these portions 

 together with the tax make up the whole of the wages (l + ii)w. 

 Let the tax be a portion t of the whole. Then 



/(l+«) + (I-/)(l+£)+'(l + «)=l+«. or 



f(l + u)(l+y)+fy'm (1 -/)(! +«)(!+ y') + (1 -/) 7 V = ft _ m 



l+y + ym 1+7 + 7^ \ )\ )• 



From this equation 7' being known, u is known, or vice versa. 



It appears from the result that the problem of the incidence 

 of a tax on wages, under the conditions here supposed, is inde- 

 terminate. A part falls on the consumer in raised prices, a part 

 on the capitalist in diminished profits; and the principles hitherto 

 assumed do not enable us to determine the respective amount of 

 these portions. In fact we suppose both the consumer and 

 the capitalist, to be entirely passive, so as to have no power of 

 throwing their loss on any other person, and on this supposition 



