5 o8 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



In other words, according to Shakespeare, as well as according to po- 

 litical economy and common sense, however brilliant may be the 

 imagination of the poet or inventor, he has no property in his ideas 

 or imaginings until he has reduced them through labor to an actu- 

 ality. And then the value of the actuality produced for the purpose 

 of exchange or sale, provided there is a copyright or a patent to 

 prevent use without compensation, will be just in proportion to 

 the effectiveness or desirability of the labor exerted upon or em- 

 bodied in it. The standard for measuring the value of the work of a 

 Shakespeare, a James Watt, and a street sweeper is one and the 

 same. 



Again, an annuity, like a bank stock, is a right to receive prop- 

 erty, the result of previously accumulated labor, and its transfer 

 by sale or bequest is simply a transfer of an equitable right; and 

 a right of this character, in turn, is not property, but a title to 

 pre-existing property. So, also, in respect to franchises, which, 

 although often spoken of and regarded as property, are clearly 

 nothing but rights. Thus, for example, a franchise of a railroad 

 is simply a right to operate a road in a particular manner; and 

 a legislature can not and does not create a railroad by creating 

 or granting a franchise. At the same time, the value of a physical 

 actuality may undoubtedly be increased by a franchise which gives 

 a right to use such actuality in a particular way. A monopoly, also, 

 like a franchise, is valuable, but its value consists in the fact that it 

 gives to certain persons privileges that are taken from others, and the 

 making of a monopoly no more creates property than does the mak- 

 ing of a franchise. 



Some persons, whose opinions are worthy of respect, have raised 

 a point in discussing this question, that there is a distinction to be 

 recognized between property and capital; and that both in law and 

 political economy the latter does not necessarily conform to the 

 definition that has been here given to the former. But can there be 

 such a thing as capital which does not represent a physical actuality 

 in the sense of embodied labor? Capital is the interest of a person 

 in embodied labor over and above his debts, or his interest in legal or 

 equitable rights to embodied labor, and can have no value, and is 

 merely imaginary, except it has the right, title, or power to command 

 embodied labor, or to exercise dominion over property the result of 

 labor. All that we labor and toil for is embodied labor. We will 

 not give our labor for the " baseless fabric of a vision," or our accu- 

 mulated labor for the dreamy creations of a Berkeley or the imagi- 

 nary castles of poets, except so far as they make them manifest in 

 material forms or writings. 



By some, also, the forces of Nature are regarded as property; but 



