476 REPORT—1890. 
Just as there are checks to the migration of capital so there are 
hindrances to the migration of labour. These have been dwelt upon by 
all economic writers, and they need not be enumerated. Admitting their 
existence, as well as the barriers in the way of migration of capital, there 
will, nevertheless, be a tendency towards migration where any disturb- 
ance of economic equilibrium occurs, and in this way the effects of a 
reduction in the hours of labour in some of the industries of the country 
may possibly be far-reaching and affect industries generally. 
Assuming, as we are justified in doing, that the net produce per pro- 
ducer per annum will tend to be reduced by a reduction in the hours of 
labour—the number of producers remaining the same, but the net 
produce being diminished, or the net produce remaining the same, the 
number of producers being increased—it remains to consider on which 
of the producing classes—landlords, capitalists, and labourers—the loss 
will tend to fal), 
Theoretically it might be argued that the loss will tend in the 
first instance to fall on the landlord, inasmuch as the art of production 
will tend to be increased, and land at the margin of cultivation will tend 
to go out of cultivation. The surplus available for rent will be decreased. 
We ought not, however, to ignore the fact that at the margin of cultiva- 
tion there is no rent on which the loss can fall. A certain amount of 
land may, as we have seen,! go out of use or of cultivation, and the 
capital and the labour employed on such land will compete with the 
capital and the labour engaged in other industries, thus sending down 
both profit and wages. Further, to the extent that land goes out of use 
or of cultivation, the supplies of either the raw material of industry or 
of food will be decreased. If industry be checked by the want of raw 
material, interest and wages will be further decreased, whilst a diminished 
supply of food will tend to Jessen still further real interest and real 
wages. But it may be said that industry will require the same amount 
of raw material as before, and labour will demand the same supply of 
food. This is possible; but the former cultivators on the margin will 
only resume their occupations when others are willing to give them in 
exchange for raw material or food such an extra amount of produce as 
will cover the loss sustained by the decrease in the hours of labour. 
This extra produce must come out of the amount available for interest 
and wages in other industries; and thusa loss, which in the first instance 
fell on the landlord, might ultimately tend to be thrown, in part at least, 
on the capitalist or on the labourer or on both. 
I have assumed that the only industries on the margin are those 
producing food or raw material. What would be the result if we 
suppose that every industry in which the reduction takes place has a_ 
‘margin of cultivation’ at which point no rent is payable? For the sake 
of simplicity, let it be assumed that the consequent reduction in the 
amount of raw material and of food corresponds to the reduction in 
the product of manufacturing industry. Produce rents will fall, and the 
capital and labour set free will either remain idle or go to reduce interest 
and wages in all industries. In other words, the loss in the first 
instance tends to fall on the landlord, but a portion of such loss will be 
eventually transferred to interest and to wages. 
1 Ante, p. 473. 
ae 
