212 



GENERAL INCREASE OF WAGES, ETC. 



c 



w 



{- 



through the lowered purchasing power of the consumer, and 

 so producing a check, or temporary equilibrium. 



From this reasoning it follows that the surplus produce (fJ), 

 while increasing the general store, and thus tending to lower 

 prices to consumers, yet rent or earnings of landlords per se 

 do not enter into the market price in any way, and therefore 

 do not increase the price of products to consumer. 



Therefore it follows that the ultimate exchange price, 

 whether maximum or mimimum, is wholly determined thus : — 



(D m - D 1 _ f P rm 

 (D - T> n / \ P m 



How, then, can any arbitrary increase or decrease of TV 

 affect E (rent), except in an indirect way, by its effect upon 

 consumer, who certainly would have his real wages or pur- 

 chasing power diminished correspondingly with any arbitrary 

 increase to the nominal wages of W. 



It can be shown, in a similar way, that the profit of the 

 farmer, or entrepreneur, and the interest of Capitalists are 

 determined solely by competition with each other, and are in 

 no way affected by cost of machinery or wages of labour so long 

 as these latter elements of cost are common to all competing 

 farmers, entrepreneurs and capitalists. In all their enter- 

 prises such charges plus their own profit (solely determined by 

 comparative skill, enterprise and competition) make up the 

 final cost of products which does not stay with the landlord or 

 entrepreneurs, but is passed on, and wholly borne by 

 consumers ; and therefore it is as consumers (not as landlords, 

 farmers, entrepreneurs, capitalists or wage-earners) that all 

 classes concerned in production are affected by any arbitrary 

 increase to the nominal wages of the labourer. 



These arguments, while demonstrating the accuracy of my 

 original observation that " It is the consumers of products or 

 services who would ultimately lose by the advantage gained by 

 the industries whose wages were nominally raised, and not the 

 capitalists and employers (as such) who directly were obliged 

 to advance the nominal wages" they also form a complete 

 refutation of Mr. Ogilvy's opposing argument, tending to 

 show that " Mvery enforced rise of wages will he clear gain to 

 the labourer, because the loss will fall upon the landlord, and stag 

 there." 



The fact that rent forms no part of the price of agri- 

 cultural produce may startle many who have not given the 

 matter deep consideration, and although affirmed by me as a 

 truth, it must not be supposed that I take up a singular 

 attitude in respect to this question : for it is the generally 

 accepted opinion of the ablest economists and thinkers of the 

 day. In proof of this I need only cite one witness, Mr. F. A. 

 Walker, whose able work on Political Economy, published in 



