182 CAPITxVL — THE MOTHER OF LABOUR iv 



the degree of ^^erfection exhibited by this passage. 

 Who lias ever imagined that ^Yealth Avhich, in tlie 

 hands of an employer, is capital, ceases to be capital 

 if it is in the hands of a labom^er? Suppose 

 a workman to be paid thirty shillings on Saturday 

 evening for six days' labour, that thirty shillings 

 comes out of the employer's capital, and receives 

 the name of " wages " simply because it is ex- 

 changed for labour. In the workman's pocket, 

 as he goes home, it is a part of his capital, in 

 exactly the same sense as, half an hour before, it 

 was part of the employer's capital ; he is a 

 capitalist just as much as if he Avere a Rothschild. 

 Suppose him to be a single man, whose cooking 

 and household matters are attended to by the 

 people of the house in which he has a room ; 

 then the rent which he pays them out of this 

 capital is, in part, wages for their labour, and he 

 is, so far, an employer. If he saves one shilling 

 out of his thirty, he has, to that extent, added to 

 his capital when the next Saturday comes round. 

 And if he puts his saved shillings week by week 

 into the Savings Bank, the difference between him 

 and the most bloated of bankers is simply one of 

 degree. 



At page 42, we arc confidently told that 

 " labourers by receiving wages " cannot lessen 

 " even temporarily " the " capital of the employer," 

 while at page 44 it is admitted that in certain 

 cases the capitalist " pays out cajDital in wages." 



