POLITICAL ECONOMY. 



Political the future ; and, without excluding himself from such 

 Economy, occupations, he will call them a loss of time. 



Whatever holds of the isolated man, with regard 

 to creating and preserving wealth, is true also of 

 society, when labour, shared among numerous in- 

 dividuals, is recompensed by wages, while its fruits 

 are distributed by exchange. For the society, as well 

 as for the Solitary ;there may be a useless as well as an 

 unproductive kind of labour ; and, though both of 

 them be paid, they still preserve their distinct charac- 

 ter, since the first corresponds not to the desires or 

 wants of the labourer's employer, and the second ad- 

 mils no accumulation of its fruits. The wage paid to the 

 workmen in either case must not mislead us ; it puts the 

 payer of it in the workman's place. The part which 

 we formerly supposed to be performed by a single in- 

 dividual, is now shared among two or more persons ; 

 but the result is not altered in the least. The day-la- 

 bourer who plants olives performs a task which is use- 

 less to his employer, though, if he receives his hire, it 

 may be advantageous to himself. The man who de- 

 fends his master or society against bears or hostile en- 

 terprises ; who takes charge of the health or the per- 

 sons of others ; who provides the enjoyment of music 

 or dramatic exhibition or dancing, performs, just like 

 the Solitary, a work which is useful because it is agree- 

 able, which is lucrative to him because he receives a 

 hire for his labour, whilst he abandons the enjoyment 

 of it to his employers ; but which is unproductive not- 

 withstanding, because it cannot be the object of saving 

 and accumulation. He who paid the wage, no longer 

 has either the wage itself in his possession, or the thing 

 for which he gave it. 



Thus labour and economy the true sources of 

 wealth exist for the Solitary as well as for the social 

 man, and produce the same kind of advantage to both. 

 The formation of society, however, and with it the in- 

 troduction of commerce and exchange, were necessary 

 both to augment the productive power of labour, by 

 dividing it, and to afford a more precise aim to econo- 

 my, by multiplying the enjoyments which wealth pro- 

 cures. Thus men, combined in society, produced more 

 than if each had laboured separately ; and they pre- 

 serve better what they have produced, because they 

 feel the value of it better. 



Exchange first arose from superabundance : " Give 

 me that article, which is of no service to you, and 

 would be useful to me," said one of the contracting 

 parties, " and I will give you this in return, which is 

 of no service to me and would be useful to you." Pre- 

 sent utility was not, however, the sole measure of 

 things exchanged. Each estimated for himself the 

 selling price, or the trouble and time bestowed in the 

 production of his own commodity, and compared it 

 with the buying price, or the trouble and time neces- 

 sary for procuring the required commodity by his own 

 efforts; and no exchange could take place till the two 

 contracting parties, on calculating the matter, had each 

 discovered that it was better thus to procure the com- 

 modity wanted than to make it for himself. This ac- 

 cidental advantage soon pointed out to both a constant 

 source of advantage in trading, whenever the one offer- 

 ed an article which he excelled in making, for an arti- 

 cle which the other excelled in making ; for each ex- 

 celled in what he made often, each was unskilful and 

 slow at what he made but seldom. Now, the more ex- 

 clusively they devoted themselves to one kind of work, the 

 more dexterity did they acquire in it, the more effectu- 

 ally did they succeed in rendering it easy and expedi- 



tious. This observation produced the division of Political 

 trades ; the husbandman quickly perceived, that he ^ 

 could not make as many agricultural tools by him- 

 self, in a month, as the blacksmith would make for him 

 in a day. 



The same principle which at first separated the 

 trades of the husbandman, shepherd, smith, and wea- 

 ver, continued to separate those trades into an indefi- 

 nite number of departments. Each felt that, by sim- 

 plifying the operation committed to him, he would 

 perform it in a manner still more speedy and perfect. 

 The weaver renounced the business of spinning and 

 dyeing ; the spinning of hemp, cotton, wool, and silk, 

 became each a separate employment; weavers were 

 still farther subdivided, according to the fabric and the 

 destination of their stuffs ; and at every subdivision, 

 each workman, directing his attention to a single ob- 

 ject, experienced an increase in his productive powers. 

 Jn the interior of each manufactory, this division was 

 again repeated, and still with the same success. Twen- 

 ty workmen all laboured at the same thing, but each 

 made it undergo a different operation ; and the twenty 

 workmen found that they had accomplished twenty 

 times as much work as when each had laboured sepa- 

 rately. 



Much more work was executed in the world by the 

 division of labour; but, at the same time, much more 

 was required to supply the consumption. The wants 

 and the enjoyments of the Solitary, who laboured for 

 himself, were both very limited. Food, clothing, and 

 lodging, he indeed required ; but he did not so much 

 as think of the delicacies, by which the satisfaction of 

 those wants might be converted into pleasure ; and still 

 less of the artificial desires, induced by society, which 

 in their gratification become new sources of enjoy- 

 ment. The Solitary's aim was merely to amass, that 

 he might afterwards repose. Before him, at no great 

 distance, was a point in the accumulation of wealth, 

 beyond which it would have been foolishness to accu- 

 mulate more, because his consumption could not be 

 increased proportionably. But the wants of the social 

 man were infinite, because the society's labour offered 

 him enjoyment infinitely varied. Whatever wealth he 

 might amass, he could never have occasion to say it is 

 enough : he still found means to convert it into plea- 

 sure, and to imagine at least that he applied it to his 

 service. 



Trade, the generic name given to the total mass of 

 exchanges, complicated the relation required to sub- 

 sist between production and consumption; yet far from 

 diminishing, it increased its importance. At first, every 

 one procured what he himself intended to consume; but 

 when each had come to work for all, the production 

 of all must be consumed by all ; and each, in what he 

 produced, must have an eye to the final demand of 

 the society, for which he destined the fruit of his la- 

 bour. This demand, though not well ascertained by 

 him, was limited in quantity ; for, in order to continue 

 his expenditure, every one must confine it by certain 

 restrictions, and the sum of those private expenditures 

 constituted that of the society. 



The distinction between capital and income, which 

 in the Solitary's case was still confused, became essen- 

 tial in society. The social man was under the necessi- 

 ty of adjusting his consumption to his income, and 

 the society of which he formed part, were compelled to 

 observe the same rule; without incurring ruin, they could 

 not annually consume more than their annual income, 

 leaving their capital untouched. All that they produced, 



