202 STUDIES, SCIENTIFIC AND SOCIAL chap. 



to it. Between 1862 and 1873 I find that 162 persons 

 died with fortunes of over a quarter of a million. In the 

 next ten years they had increased to 208 persons who had 

 died with fortunes of over a quarter of a million. This is 

 an increase of over 29 per cent. The detailed figures 

 show still more remarkable results, because they show that 

 the increase was still more rapid in very great fortunes, in 

 fortunes over a million. In addition to that a very con- 

 siderable number of great landowners have died who paid 

 no probate duty, but whose capitalised fortunes have been 

 from one to five millions sterling each. We have not the 

 exact figures, but still we know that their fortunes have 

 been of late increasing, owing to the increase of our large 

 towns and the enormous increase of ground rents which 

 have arisen in them. The main result is, that a few, that 

 is comparatively few, have become much richer than they 

 ever were before ; and it appears to me that it is a demon- 

 strable fact that, when those who are very rich suddenly 

 become more numerous and still richer, without any 

 increased power of wealth-creation independent of labour, 

 then, as a necessary result, those who are poor become 

 poorer. 



This principle was laid down very clearly by Adam 

 Smith, strange to say, in the very first sentence of his 

 Wealth of Nations, but I do not know that much 

 attention has been paid to it. The sentence is this. He 

 says : 



' ' The actual labour of every nation is the fund which originally 

 supplies it with all the necessaries and conveniences of life which it 

 actually consumes, and which consists always either in the immediate 

 produce of that labour or in what is purchased with that produce 

 from other nations." 



This lays down a proposition perfectly clear, that there is 

 no other source whatever of wealth in the country than 

 the produce of the labour of its people. Hence it follows 

 absolutely and indisputably, that if a larger proportion of 

 that wealth goes to the few, a smaller proportion must 

 remain with the many. As some people may not clearly 

 see the bearing of this statement of Adam Smith, let me 

 just illustrate it by a few particular cases. It is quite 



