1822.) 
‘Salgado in the same province, are salt 
springs, which are not used, whilst the 
salt is brought from Rio Janeiro to that 
inland province, a distance of between 
2 and 300 leagues. 
Great quantities of sea-salt are daily 
imported from Setaval and the Cape 
Verd islands, yet no one ever yet at- 
tempted to make any of this kind along 
the immense extent of the Brazilian 
coast. 
Scarcely any good rum, or any other 
spirituous liquors, are as yet distilled ; 
and brandies, and even wine vinegar, 
‘are imported from France, Spain, and 
Portugal. 
In short, in this fertile country, a 
man of property may make the fortune 
of bundreds of families, who in Europe 
are suffering want without any prospect 
of ever being richer ; at the same time 
he may himself, within a few years, 
double his own fortune ; the poor pea- 
sant who follows him may soon be- 
come a wealthy and independent pro- 
prietor, and the industrious and active 
artizan may, through the support of his 
patron, and by his own exertions, Soon 
amass a fortune for himself and his 
posterity. 
In conclusion it should be observed, 
that the Portuguese government gua- 
rantees to the contracting parties to 
enforce the execution of all the stipu- 
lations they may have agreed upon in 
Europe. 
——— 
__.. For the Monthly, Magazine... 
THE POLITICAL ECONOMIST, 
NO. II. 
On certain Verbal Differences between 
Smith, Ricardo, Malthus, and Say. 
_ CLOUD of writers have appear- 
{ed lately on Political Economy, 
who, without adding to the substan- 
tial truths of the science, have thrown 
great obstacles in the way of its suc- 
cessful cultivation; and, by involving 
it in a mass of verbal distinctions and 
metaphysical refinements, with which 
it had no mannér of connexion, les- 
‘sened its utility in public estimation. 
Already their disputes have been 
‘compared to the wranglings of the 
schoolmen; and a branch of know- 
ledge, which of all others has the most 
intimate bearing on the social state, 
has been considered no better than 
the differences about the origin of 
evil, or the best possible world. This 
will not appear surprising to those 
who have attended to the subjects on 
MontHty Mac. No. 371. 
The Political Economist, No, I. 
17 
which the most eminent economists 
are divided. They do not differ about 
principles, but words: haying ascer- 
tamed how wealth may be best ac- 
quired, they quarrel about the nature 
of wealth itself,—whether it be mate- 
rial or immaterial; whether wealth be 
value, or value wealth; and fifty other 
follies, on the relative utility of pro- 
ductive and unproductive consumers. 
To a person standing aloof from 
these disputes,—who has no favourite 
system at stake, who looks only to the 
simple truth, regardless of the result, 
—they appear extremely absurd. But 
what renders this economical battle 
most to be lamented is, that the par- 
ties themselves appear to be well- 
meaning personages, sincere and inde- 
pendant in their opinions, but actuated 
by a sort of perverse ingenuity, a de- 
sire of novelty, or of making too much 
of their real or imaginary discoveries. 
Without noticing at present the more 
important dogmas on which they are 
divided, we will illustrate one parti- 
cular error into which they have all 
fallen, and which seems a funda- 
mental cause of their differences. 
The. error to which we allude is 
their attempting to define certain com- 
mon words, and give to them a mean- 
ing different from that in which they 
are usually received. .Qn definitions 
generally it may be observed, that the 
object of them is not to invent new 
meanings, but to ascertain precisely 
the sense which usage has sanctioned. 
Without this limitation, the end of 
language is perverted, and it ceases 
to be a common medium for the in- 
terchange of ideas. lf a writer may 
define his terms as he pleases, he may 
prove what he pleases: with such lati- 
tude, there is no paradox, however 
absurd, which may not be established. 
But when a proposition is affirmed, of 
course the words it contains must be 
understood in their ordinary sense; 
for it will never do for a person, an- 
nouncing as a new discovery that one 
and two make four, to turn round 
and tell us, that by two he means 
three. : 
A negleet of this rule has been tlie 
origin of much of the falsé reasoning, 
and many of the idle subtleties, which 
have marked the attention of man- 
kind » and a disregard to it is the chief 
cause of the differences of the econo~ 
mists. They have all attempted to 
define certain familiar words, as value 
D and 
