REDEEM cec -— 
CannUTHERS.—On some of the Terms used in Political Economy. 11 
and thus made articles of trade, he will become a productive labourer. 
Such an improvement in the phonograph would be, of course, a great 
addition to the wealth of the world. The labour of the singer, instead of 
adding to the pleasure of hundreds as at present, would give pleasure of a 
very high order to tens of thousands. The average happiness of man would 
be inereased, but I do not see how the improvement would so change the 
charaeter of the singer's labour as to convert it from unproductive to 
productive. 
Throughout the whole of his chapter on ** Unproductive Labour," Mill 
appears to have in mind, production of profits rather than production of 
wealth. The so-called unproductive labourers— authors, actors, publie 
singers, lawyers, physicians, soldiers, sailors in the navy, civil servants, 
etc.—are men whose labour is as necessary to the well-being of society as 
that of any other class, but for the most part they work on their own 
account and are not dependent on capitalists. The product of their labour 
cannot be passed from hand to hand, and cannot, therefore, be made the 
instrument for acquiring a right to a share of the wealth of the community ; 
it is, in short, not productive of profits or of capital. 
Of all the products of labour, food is the most necessary, and may, 
therefore, most justly be called wealth. The community at large is not, 
however, enriched by the labour of the farmer more than by that of the 
actor or public singer. Without the farmer's labour the community could 
not exist at all, but without the actor’s labour it could not maintain that 
average state of enjoyment in which it lives and to which the labour of 
both is equally necessary. The product of the labour of both can only be 
enjoyed once, and when once used is gone for ever. 
Far too much stress is laid on the aceumulation of wealth in most works 
on political economy, especially when discussing productive labour, and too 
little on the kind of wealth which can be, or at least should be, accumulated. 
We are unfortunately obliged to store sufficient grain for one year's con- 
sumption, but there would be no use in accumulating a stock sufficient for 
several years, unless, like Pharaoh, we anticipated a drought. So with 
clothing and all other forms of direct wealth; there is no advantage in 
having a large stock of them on hand. The makers and sellers of all kinds 
of direct wealth always strive to keep the stock in existence, and not in 
actual use, as small as possible, while the consumers take care that the 
stock in use shall not be needlessly large. No one has any interest or wish 
to acquire or keep a stock of commodities which will not be shortly 
consumed, or put into the consumers’ hands for use. 
Under the social system prevailing in all civilized countries, everyone 
