CanRUTHERS.—O some of the Terms used in Political Economy. 19 
duces is shared by a larger number. As nothing can be done without 
implements, the stock of these must be kept up, and whenever increasing 
population or increasing knowledge makes it possible to do so with 
advantage, it should be increased. Care must, however, be taken that the 
future advantage shall not be purchased at the cost of an undue present 
sacrifice. 
The fourth theorem is, that “ What supports and employs productive 
labour is the capital expended in setting it to work, and not the demand of 
purchasers for the produce of the labour when completed. Demand for 
commodities is not demand for labour. * * * * The maintenance or 
payment of labour depends on the amount of capital or other funds directly 
devoted to the sustenance and remuneration of labour.” The main deduc- 
tion from this theorem is, that a capitalist, by buying velvet or other 
commodity for his own use, does not improve the circumstances of the 
working classes, but that by employing gardeners, grooms, and other 
retainers, or by giving alms, he does so. The error contained in this 
deduetion unfortunately pervades Mill's work, and makes that part of it 
which treats of the production of wealth far less valuable than that which 
treats of its distribution. 
If two capitalists, A and B, are entitled to equal shares of the wealth 
of the community, and both invest their shares from year to year, the 
working classes will receive the whole product of their own labour; A and 
B will receive none of it. If they retain for their own use a certain pro- 
portion which we may call interest, and invest the balance, the labourers 
will receive, not the whole, but a part only, the part received from A being 
equal to that received from B. Let us now assume that both resolve to 
consume the whole themselves; A deciding to take his share in the form 
of attendance on himself, while B decides to procure velvet; the wealth 
which had been produced by the labourers they had previously employed 
must in both cases be again given to the working classes; in A’s case it 
goes to grooms and footmen ; in B's case it goes to velvet weavers. When 
the wealth is all consumed, the labourers get no more from either A or B; 
A has received the share of wealth he was entitled to in the form of the 
services of his attendants, and having done nothing to entitle him to any 
share of future wealth his right lapses. B gets a certain quantity of velvet 
which he uses for his own pleasure, the labouring classes get no benefit from 
it, and, as in the case of A, his right to a share of future wealth also lapses. 
It is obvious that in both cases the labourers receive precisely the same 
advantage ; A has done no more good than. B. 
If A had not come to the selfish resolve to apply his wealth to his own 
