Translator’S Preface
[1] Notice, etc., p. 30, ‹note› [TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE: This refers to NOTE 11 Below].
NOTICE OF THE LIFE AND WRITINGS OF FRÉDÉRIC BASTIAT.
[2] ‹Notice sur la vie, etc.›—‹Œuvres Complètes›, t. i. pp. 10, 11.
[3] ‹Correspondance›—‹Œuvres Complètes›, t. i. p. 27. ‹Revue des Deux Mondes›, t. xvii. p. 139.
[4] ‹Œuvres Complètes›, tome i. p. 244.
[5] Tome xvii. p. 148.
[6] ‹Revue des Deux Mondes›, t. xvii. p. 146.
[7] ‹Correspondance›—‹Œuvres Complètes›, t. i. p. 99.
[8] ‹Notice sur la vie›, etc.—‹Œuvres Complètes›, t. i. p. 18.
[9] This admirable work, the best and most complete treatise on money which exists in any language, well deserves a place in English literature.
[10] “God made the country; and it is perhaps in surveying plains, and meads, and mountains, remote from man, that the mind is most elevated to pure and high contemplations. But cities, temples, and the memorials of past ages, bridges, aqueducts, statues, pictures, and all the elegancies and comforts of the town, are equally the work of God, through the propensities of His creatures, and, we must presume, for the fulfilment of His design.”—‹Sir Charles Bell on the Hand›, ch. 3.
[11] The following list of chapters, intended to complete the ‹Harmonies Économiques›, found among the author’s papers, is exceedingly interesting. Of those marked * no notes or traces were found.
«Normal Phenomena.»
1. Producer—Consumer. 2. The Two Aphorisms. 3. Theory of Rent. 4. *Money. 5. *Credit. 6. Wages. 7. Saving. 8. Population. 9. Private and Public Services. 10. *Taxation.
«Corollaries.»
11. Machinery. 12. Free Trade. 13. Intermediaries. 14. Raw Materials—Manufactured Products. 15. Luxury.
«Disturbing Phenomena.»
16. Spoliation. 17. War. 18. *Slavery. 19. *Theocracy. 20. *Monopoly. 21. Governmental Undertakings. 22. False Fraternity or Communism.
«General Views.»
23. Responsibility—Solidarity. 24. Personal Interest or Social Motive Force. 25. Perfectibility. 26. *Public Opinion. 27. *Relations of Political Economy. with Morals, *with Politics, *with Legislation, with Religion.
TO THE YOUTH OF FRANCE
[12] The First Edition of the ‹Harmonies Économiques› appeared in 1850.—«Translator.»
[13] The author employs the term ‹prolétaire›, for which we have no equivalent word, to distinguish the man who lives by wages from the man who lives upon realized property—“les hommes qui n’ont que leurs bras, les salariés.”—‹See post›, Chap. X.—«Translator.»
[14] I shall explain this law by figures: Suppose three periods during which capital increases, labour remaining the same. Let the total production at these three periods be as 80—100—120. It will be thus divided:
Capitalist’s Labourer’s Total. share. share. First Period, 45 35 80 Second Period, 50 50 100 Third Period, 55 65 120
Of course these proportions are merely given for the sake of illustration.
I. NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL ORGANIZATION
[15] This Chapter was first published in the ‹Journal des Économistes›, January 1848.—«Editor.»
[16] Allusion to a socialist work of the day—‹La Reforme industrielle, ou la Phalanstère, par Ch. Fourier›.—«Translator.»
[17] ‹Métayage› is a mode of letting farms in the south of Europe, where the landlord furnishes a proportion of the means of cultivation, and shares the produce with the cultivator, or ‹métayer›.—«Translator.»
[18] “It is averred that the régime of free competition demanded by an ignorant Political Economy, and intended to do away with monopolies, tends only to the general organization of monster monopolies in all departments.”—‹Principes du Socialisme, par M. Considérant›, p. 15.
II. WANTS, EFFORTS, SATISFACTIONS
[19] This and the following chapter were inserted in the ‹Journal des Économistes›, September and December 1848.—«Editor.»
[20] Icarie, Phalanstère, etc.,—allusion to Socialist works of the day.—«Translator.»
[21] “Our industrial régime, founded on competition without guarantee and without organization, is then only a social hell, a vast realization of all the torments and all the punishments of the ancient Tænarus. There is one difference, however—namely, the victims.”—(‹Vide Considérant.›)
III. WANTS OF MAN
[22] A mathematical law of frequent occurrence, but very little understood in Political Economy.
[23] One of the indirect objects of this work is to combat modern sentimental schools, who, in spite of facts, refuse to admit that suffering to any extent enters into the designs of Providence. As these schools are said to proceed from Rousseau, I must here cite to them a passage from their master: “The evil which we see is not absolute evil; and far from being directly antagonistic to the good, it concurs with it in the universal harmony.”
[24] The term ‹consumption› employed by English Economists, the French Economists translate by ‹consommation›.—«Translator.»
IV. EXCHANGE
[25] V. J. B. Say.
[26] Moreover, this slave, by reason of his superiority, ends in the long-run by depreciating and emancipating all others. This is a ‹harmony› which I leave to the sagacity of the reader to follow to its consequences.
[27] See ‹Sophismes Économiques› (English edition), 2d series, p. 127, ‹et seq.›
[28] What follows is from a note found among the author’s papers. Had he lived, he would have incorporated the substance of it in the body of his dissertation on Exchange. All that we feel authorized to do is to place it at the end of the present chapter.—«Editor.»
[29] See, for the refutation of this error, chapter xi., ‹post.›—Also chapters ii. and iii. of ‹Sophismes Économiques›, English Edition.
V. OF VALUE
[30] I have ventured to state elsewhere some of the reasons which induce me to doubt the entire soundness of Bastiat’s conclusions on the subject of Rent and the Value of Land.—See note to chapter ix. ‹post›.—«Translator.»
[31] French Economists of the school of Quesnay.—«Translator.»
[32] Adds! The subject had then intrinsic value, anterior to the bestowal of labour upon it. That could only come from nature. The action of nature is not then ‹gratuitous›, according to this showing; but in that case, who can have the audacity to exact payment for this portion of ‹superhuman› value?
[33] The French Economists translate our word ‹consumption› by consommation.—«Translator.»
[34] It is because, in a state of freedom, efforts compete with each other that they obtain this remuneration nearly in proportion to their intensity. But, I repeat, this proportionality is not inherent in the notion of value.
It is a proof that where this competition does not exist the proportionality ceases. In that case we discover no relation between divers kinds of labour and their remuneration.
The absence of competition may result from the nature of things or from human perversity.
If it arises from the nature of things, we shall see a very small amount of labour give rise to great ‹value›, and no one have reason to complain. Such is the case of the man who finds a diamond. Such is the case of Rubini, of Malibran, of Taglioni, of a fashionable tailor, of the proprietor of the Clos-Vougeot, etc., etc. Circumstances have put them in possession of rare means of rendering service; they have no rivals, and exact a high price. ‹The service being, from its very nature, of excessive rarity›, shows that it is not essential to the well-being and progress of mankind. It is an object of luxury, of vanity, which wealthy people are enabled to procure. Is it not natural that a man, before indulging in such satisfactions, should wait until he finds himself in a situation to provide for wants which are more imperious and more reasonable?
If competition is absent in consequence of some human intervention, the same effects are produced, but with this enormous difference, that they have been produced where they ought not. In that case we see a comparatively small amount of labour give rise to great value; but how? By forcibly interdicting that competition the effect of which is to proportion remuneration to services. Then, just as Rubini might say to a ‹dilettante›. “You must pay me handsomely, or I don’t sing this evening,”—presuming on being able to render a service which no one else can render,—in the same way a butcher, a baker, a landlord, a banker, may say, “I must have an extravagant price, or you shall have none of my corn, my bread, my meat, my gold; and I have adopted precautions, I shall employ force, to prevent you being able to provide yourself elsewhere, and to make sure that no one shall render you services analogous to mine.”
People who assimilate artificial to what they call natural monopolies, because they have this in common, that they enhance the value of labour, such people, I say, are both blind and superficial.
Artificial monopoly is nothing else than spoliation. It produces evils which, apart from it, did not exist. It inflicts privations on a considerable portion of society, frequently as regards commodities of primary necessity. Moreover, it gives rise to irritation, hatreds, reprisals,—all the fruits of injustice.
Natural advantages do no harm to mankind. At most we can say that they merely exhibit pre-existent evils, imputable to no one. It may be regretted, perhaps, that tokay is not as cheap and as abundant as ‹vin ordinaire›. But that is not a social evil; it is one imposed on us by nature.
Between natural and artificial monopolies, then, there is this essential difference:
The one is the effect of scarcity, pre-existent and inevitable.
The other is the effect of a scarcity which is factitious and unnatural.
In the first case, it is not the absence of competition which creates the scarcity; it is the scarcity which explains the absence of competition. Society would be puerile were it to complain and torment itself because there is in the world only one Jenny Lind, one Clos-Vougeot, one Regent.
In the second case it is very different. It is not on account of a providential scarcity that competition becomes impossible, but because force has repressed and put down competition that there is created among men a scarcity which ought not to have existed.—(‹Note extracted from MSS. left by the Author.›)
[35] ‹Vide post›, chap. xv.
‹Accumulation› is a circumstance of no account in Political Economy.
Let the satisfaction be immediate or delayed, let it be adjourned or follow instantly on the effort,—in what respect does this change the nature of things?
I choose to make a sacrifice to enjoy the pleasure of hearing a fine voice. I go to the theatre, and pay for my entertainment—the satisfaction is immediate. I devote my money to the purchase of a basket of strawberries, and I can delay my satisfaction till to-morrow—that is all.
It may be said that the strawberries constitute wealth, because I can exchange them. True. Whilst the effort has been made and the satisfaction is delayed, wealth subsists. It is satisfaction which destroys wealth. When the strawberries been eaten the satisfaction will be on a level with that which I derived from hearing Alboni.
Service received—service rendered—this is political economy.—(‹Note from MSS. left by the Author.›)
[36] What follows was intended by the author to form part of this chapter.
[37] These are the words by which Roman lawyers designated what they termed ‹innominate› contracts, as distinguished from contracts with known names, as ‹purchase› and ‹sale›, ‹letting›, ‹hiring›, ‹borrowing›, ‹lending›, etc.—«Translator.»
[38] ‹Traité d’Économie Politique›, p. 1.
VI. WEALTH
[39] ‹Nouvel essai sur la Richesse des Nations›, p. 438.
[40] ‹Ib.›, p. 263.
[41] ‹Ib.›, p. 456.
[42] ‹Ib.›, p. 456.
[43] ‹Nouvel essai sur la Richesse des Nations›, p. 161.
[44] ‹Ib.›, p. 168.
[45] ‹Ib.›, p. 168
[46] ‹Ib.›, p. 63.
[47] The Earl of Lauderdale, from adopting the false principle which the author here exposes, fell into the same error, maintaining that “‹an increase of riches›, when arising from alterations in the quantity of commodities, is always a proof of the immediate ‹diminution of wealth›,” and that a diminution of riches is evidence of an immediate increase of wealth; and that “in proportion as the ‹riches› of individuals are increased by an augmentation of the ‹value› of any commodity, the wealth of the nation is generally diminished; and in proportion as the mass of individual ‹riches› is diminished by the diminution of the ‹value› of the commodity, the national opulence is generally increased.” This melancholy paradox Lord Lauderdale maintained stoutly in a set treatise. See ‹Inquiry into the Nature and Origin of Public Wealth by the Earl of Lauderdale›. Edition 1804, p. 50. Mr Ricardo has given an exposition of the “Distinctive Properties of Value and Riches” in his work on the ‹Principles of Political Economy›. Third Edition, p. 320.—«Translator.»
[48] “Do you take the side of Competition, you are wrong—do you argue against Competition, you are still wrong; which means that you are always right.”—P. J. Proudhon, ‹Contradictions Économiques›, p. 182.
[49] Always this perpetual and lamentable confusion between Value and Utility? I can show you many utilities which are not appropriated, but I defy you to show me in the whole world a single ‹value› which has not a proprietor.
[50] What follows is the commencement of a supplementary note found among the papers of the author.—«Translator.»
VII. CAPITAL
[51] See my brochure entitled ‹Capital et Rente›.
[52] Allusion to Socialist works—‹La Réforme industrielle, ou le Phalanstère, Recueil periodique, rédigé par Ch. Fourier›, 1832.—‹Visite au Phalanstère, par M. Briancourt›, 1848.—‹Voyage en Icarie, par Cabet›, 1848, etc.—«Translator.»
[53] ‹Ante›, p. 82, ‹et. seq.›
VIII. PROPERTY—COMMUNITY
[54] Public warehouses where goods were deposited, and negotiable receipts issued in exchange for them.—«Translator.»
IX. LANDED PROPERTY
[55] ‹Wealth of Nations› (Buchanan’s 2d edit.), vol. ii. p. 53.
[56] ‹Ib.›, vol. ii. p. 54.
[57] ‹Ib.›, vol. ii. p. 55, note.
[58] ‹Ricardo’s Political Works› (M’Culloch’s edit.), pp. 34, 35.
[59] The words in ‹italics› and ‹capitals› are thus printed in the original text.
[60] ‹Alterner un champ›, is to rear alternate crops of corn and hay in a field.—«Translator.»
[61] On the subject of Rent, and the constituent elements of the Value of Land, Bastiat would seem to have adopted, though perhaps unconsciously, the theory of Mr Carey, in his able and original work on ‹The Principles of Political Economy› (Philadelphia, 1837-38). Practically, no doubt, Mr Carey’s view of the subject to a great extent holds true. If we take into account all the labour and capital laid out in permanent ameliorations upon a field or a farm, from its first clearance to the present moment, it may be true that there is scarcely any land now under cultivation which is worth what it cost; and that the Rent yielded by such land, consequently, resolves itself into the remuneration of anterior labour. But the sweeping assertion of Bastiat, that “land which has not been subjected, directly or indirectly, to human action is everywhere destitute of value,” is certainly not correct as a “matter of fact;” for from the spot where I am now writing, I can see thousands of acres which have never since the creation had a spade, or a plough, or a human hand applied to them, which nevertheless do yield a Rent—a small rent, a shilling, a penny an acre, it may be—but a return which can by no process of analysis be resolved into the remuneration of anterior labour or capital. With regard to such land, the question of rent or no rent would seem to depend on the current and usual rate of profits.
Land in its natural state, and without cultivation, is capable of producing grass for the food of cattle, and other products capable of rendering service to man. Suppose, for example, that the agriculture of a country has reached the least productive corn-land, which yields a return of £120 for each £100 of capital employed in its cultivation, and that much of the remaining land is incapable of cultivation,—a tract of moorland, or rough pasture, for instance, like some parts of the Highlands of Scotland. Whether such land will or will not yield a rent must depend on whether the return, in sheep, cattle, copsewood, or other produce, after replacing the capital employed, exceeds or falls short of 20 per cent.
Suppose that a person possessed of a capital equal to £100, instead of applying that capital to the cultivation of the least productive corn-land, with a return equal to £120, employs his £100 in purchasing, tending, and bringing to market 100 sheep,—if the annual produce and increase of his flock, over and above his necessary outgoings, amounts only to 10 per cent. on his capital, of course he will find the rearing of sheep unprofitable, and give up the trade. He can in that case pay no rent, for his return is not equal to even the ordinary profits. But if the increase of his flock, over and above his outgoings, amounts to 30 per cent. on the capital employed, then the land to which we refer will yield a rent equal to 10 per cent. on that capital. Whether this shall be the rent of 10, of 50, or 100, or 1000 acres of land, depends entirely on how much land is required to feed 100 sheep; the greater the extent of land, the less will be the rent of each acre; it may be a pound, or a shilling, or a penny an acre; still every acre, and every part of every acre, will yield a ‹rent›. Nor does the question of rent or no rent depend on the amount of the capital employed; for if a capital of £100 employed on 10,000 acres of land yields a clear return of £130 when profits are at 20 per cent., the surplus £10 clearly constitutes rent. Rent depends on the ratio of the product to the capital employed, and if that product, or its value, exceed the capital, or its value, by more than the ordinary rate of profits, a rent, greater or less in amount, according to the value of the capital and the extent of surface over which that capital is spread, will be yielded by every inch of land capable of giving nourishment to a blade of grass.
On a searching analysis of rent, then, we always find a ‹residuum› which cannot be resolved into the remuneration of anterior labour or capital; and as the value of land in its natural and uncultivated state depends on the amount of this residuum, or rent, if that value is to be brought within the limits of Bastiat’s theory, we must apply to it the same principle which he applied (Chap. V., pp. 139-141 ‹ante›) to the case of a diamond found by accident, and resolve it, not into service rendered by undergoing labour, or ‹making an effort›, for another, but into service rendered by ‹saving› another from undergoing the labour or making the effort for himself. Bastiat seems to have felt this as he approached the conclusion of the present chapter. (See ‹post›, p. 282.)
In this part of his work, Bastiat, in his desire to refute the fallacies of the Socialists and Communists on the subject of property, seems to have gone beyond the proper domain of Political Economy; for in strictness it is not the business of that science to vindicate the institution of property, or to explain its origin. It is enough for the Economist that property ‹exists›, and all that he is concerned to do is to explain the laws which regulate the production, distribution, and consumption of wealth.—«Translator.»
[62] Ricardo.
X. COMPETITION
[63] ‹Ante›, p. 48 ‹et seq.›
[64] Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.—«Translator.»
[65] See Voltaire’s tragedy, ‹Le Fanatisme›.—«Translator.»
XI. PRODUCER—CONSUMER
[66] ‹Economic Sophisms›, chap. 1.
[67] Allusion to Socialist works. See p. 205, ‹ante›.
[68] See the author’s discourse ‹Sur l’Impôt des Boissons›, in the second edition of the pamphlet entitled ‹Incompatibilités Parlementaires›.—«Editor.»
XII. THE TWO APHORISMS
[69] When the van-guard of the Icarian expedition left Havre, I questioned some of these visionaries with a view to discover their real thoughts. ‹Competence easily obtained›, such was their hope and their motive. One of them said to me, “I am going, and my brother follows with the second expedition. He has eight children, and you see what a great thing it will be for him to have no longer to educate and maintain them.” “I see it at once,” I replied, “but that heavy charge must fall on some other body.” To rid oneself of a burden and transfer it to the shoulders of another, such was the sense in which these unfortunate people understood the apophthegm of Fraternity—‹all for each›.
[70] See the pamphlet ‹Spoliation et Loi›, p. 22 ‹et seq.›—«Editor.»
XIII. RENT
[71] Two or three short fragments are all that the author has left us on this important subject. The reason is, that he proposed, as he has told us, to set forth the views of Mr Carey of Philadelphia, in opposition to the theory of Ricardo.—«Editor.»
[72] Celebrated vineyard of Burgundy.—«Translator.»
[73] Of these intended developments none, unfortunately, exist; but we may be permitted to notice, briefly, the two principal consequences of the state of matters supposed by the author.
1. Two fields, the one cultivated, A, the other uncultivated, B, being supposed of identical quality, the amount of labour formerly devoted to the clearance of A is assumed as the necessary measure of the amount of labour required for the clearance of B. We may even say that, on account of our now superior knowledge of agriculture, of our implements, of our improved means of communication, etc., a ‹less› amount of labour would now be necessary to bring B into cultivation than was formerly required in the case of A. If land had value in itself, A would be worth all that it cost to bring it into culture, ‹plus something additional for its natural productive powers›; that is to say, much more than the sum now required to bring B into the same state. Now it is just the reverse. The field A is worth less since we buy it rather than bring B into cultivation. In purchasing A, then, we pay nothing for the natural productive powers, since the price does not even compensate the original cost of bringing it into cultivation.
2. If the field A produces 1000 measures of corn, the field B when cultivated must be supposed to produce the same quantity. The reason why A was formerly cultivated was, that formerly 1000 measures of corn amply remunerated all the labour required both for its original clearance and its annual cultivation. The reason why B is not cultivated is, that now 1000 measures of corn would not remunerate the same amount of labour, or even a less amount, as we have just before remarked.
And what does this show? Evidently that the value of human labour has risen in relation to corn; that a day’s labour is worth more wages estimated in corn. In other words, corn is obtained with less effort, and is exchanged for a less amount of labour; and the theory of ‹the progressive dearness of the means of subsistence is erroneous›.—«Editor.»
MONEY
[74] See the author’s brochure, ‹Maudit Argent›.—«Editor.»
CREDIT
[75] See the author’s brochure, ‹Gratuité du Credit›.—«Editor.»
XIV. WAGES
[76] See ‹ante›, chapters i. and ii.
[77] ‹Ante›, p. 172.
[78] See ‹post›, chapter xx., on ‹Responsibility›.
[79] Extract from ‹La Presse›, 22d June 1850.
[80] ‹Caisse de Retraite›,—a friendly accumulation society which has for object to provide for the labourer in his old age.—See an account of these ‹Caisses de Retraite› in ‹Dictionnaire de l’Économie Politique›, t. i. p. 255.—«Translator.»
[81] ‹Emeutes› of June 1848.
[82] The chapter, “‹Des Machines›,” is one of those included in the author’s list of intended additions, which he did not live to write. (See ‹Notice of Life and Writings, etc.›, p. 30, ‹ante›.)—«Translator.»
[83] For an explanation of these terms, borrowed from the Civil Law, see ‹ante›, p. 172.—«Translator.»
[84] See ‹ante›, chapter iv.
[85] The manuscript brought from Rome stops here. What is subjoined was found among the papers left by the author in Paris. It indicates how he intended to terminate and sum up this chapter.—«Editor.»
XV. SAVING
[86] Sir James Steuart of Coltness, whose ‹Inquiry into the Principles of Political Economy› was published in 1767, nine years before the appearance of Adam Smith’s great work, takes the very same view of the principle of population which Malthus, thirty years afterwards, more formally enunciated. “The generative faculty,” says Sir James Steuart, “resembles a spring loaded with a weight, which always exerts itself in proportion to the diminution of resistance. When food has remained some time without augmentation or diminution, generation will carry numbers as high as possible; if, then, food come to be diminished, the spring is overpowered, the force of it becomes less than nothing, inhabitants will diminish, at least in proportion to the overcharge. If, on the other hand, food be increased, the spring will begin to exert itself in proportion as the resistance diminishes, people will begin to be better fed, they will multiply, and, in proportion as they increase in numbers, the food will become scarce again.”—«Translator.»
[87] “Threescore and ten ‹souls›.”—‹Gen.› xlvi. 27. “Seventy ‹souls›.”—‹Exodus› i. 5. “Threescore and ten ‹persons›.”—‹Deut.› x. 22.—«Translator.»
[88] 601,730 “from twenty years old and upwards.”—‹Numbers› xxvi. 2 and 51.—«Translator.»
[89] What follows was written in 1846.—«Editor.»
[90] It is fair to mention that J. B. Say represents the ‹means of existence› as a variable quantity.
[91] “There are few states in which there is not a constant effort in the population to increase beyond the means of subsistence. This constant effort as ‹constantly tends› to subject the lower classes of society to distress, ‹and to prevent any great permanent melioration of their condition›. . . . The constant effort towards population . . . increases the number of people ‹before› the means of subsistence are increased,” etc.—«Malthus» ‹on Population›, vol. i. pp. 17, 18, 6th edition.
[92] See chap. xi. ‹ante›.
[93] “Although we might describe ‹fermage›, in a general way, as the letting or leasing of land, in whatever form it is done, we must distinguish two forms of letting, equally common in various parts of Europe, and very different in their effects. In the one form, the land is let for a fixed rent, payable in money annually. In the other, it is let under the condition of the produce being divided between the proprietor and the cultivator. It is to the first of these two modes of leasing land that we give more particularly the name of ‹fermage›. The other is generally designated in France as ‹métayage›.” (‹Dictionnaire de l’Économie Politique›, tome i. p. 759.)—«Translator.»
XVII. PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SERVICES
[94] “The moment this value is handed over by the taxpayer, it is lost to him; the moment it is consumed by the Government, it is lost to everybody, and does not return to society.”—«J. B. Say», ‹Traité d’Économie Politique›, liv. iii. chap 9.
Unquestionably; but society gains in return the service which is rendered to it—security, for example. Moreover, Say returns to the correct doctrine almost immediately afterwards, when he says,—“To levy a tax is to do a wrong to society—a wrong which is compensated by no advantage, ‹when no service is rendered to society in exchange›.”—‹Ibid.›
[95] “Public contributions, even when they are consented to by the nation, are a violation of property, seeing they can be levied only on values which have been produced by the land, capital, and industry of individuals. Thus, ‹whenever they exceed the amount indispensable for the preservation of society›, we must regard them as spoliation.”—«J. B. Say.» ‹Traité d’Économie Politique›, liv. iii. chap. 9.
Here, again, the subsequent qualification corrects the too absolute judgment previously pronounced. The doctrine that ‹services are exchanged for services›, simplifies much both the problem and its solution.
[96] Civil law terms. See ‹ante›, p. 172.
[97] The effects of such a transformation are strikingly exemplified in an instance given by M. d’Hautpoul, the Minister of War:—“Each soldier,” he says, “receives 16 centimes a day for his maintenance. The Government takes these 16 centimes, and undertakes to support him. The consequence is that all have the same rations, and of the same kind, whether it suit them or not. One has too much bread, and throws it away. Another has not enough of butcher’s meat, and so on. We have, therefore, made an experiment. We leave to the soldiers the free disposal of these 16 centimes, and we are happy to find that this has been attended with a great improvement in their condition. Each now consults his own tastes and likings, and studies the market prices of what they want to purchase. Generally they have, of their own accord, substituted a portion of butcher’s meat for bread. In some instances they buy more bread, in others more meat, in others more vegetables, in others more fish. Their health is improved; they are better pleased; and the State is relieved from a great responsibility.”
The reader will understand that it is not as bearing on military affairs that I cite this experiment. I refer to it as calculated to illustrate a radical difference between public and private service, between official regulations and liberty. Would it be better for the State to take from us our means of support, and undertake to feed us, or to leave us both our means of support and the care of feeding ourselves? The same question may be asked with reference to all our wants.
[98] See the author’s pamphlet, entitled ‹Baccalauréat et Socialisme›.—«Editor.»
[99] The author, in a previous work, had sought the solution of the same question. The subject of his inquiry was the legitimate province of law. All the developments in the pamphlet, entitled ‹La Loi›, are applicable to the subject he is now discussing. We refer the reader to that ‹brochure›.—«Editor.»
[100] Here ends the MS. We refer the reader to the author’s pamphlet entitled ‹Spoliation et Loi›, in the second part of which he has exposed the sophisms which were given utterance to at this meeting of the ‹Conseil général›.
On the subjects of the six chapters intended to follow this, under the titles of Taxation, Machinery, Free Trade, Intermediaries, Raw Materials, and Luxury, we refer the reader, ‹1st›, to the ‹Discours sur l’Impôt des Boissons›, inserted in the second edition of the pamphlet, ‹Incompatibilités Parlementaires›; ‹2dly›, to the pamphlet entitled ‹Ce qu’on voit et Ce qu’on ne voit pas›; ‹3dly›, to the ‹Sophismes Économiques›.
XVIII. DISTURBING CAUSES
[101] The author was unable to continue this examination of errors—which are for those who are misled by them a nearly immediate cause of suffering—nor to describe another class of errors, which make their appearance in the shape of violence and fraud, and the first effects of which bear heavily on others. His notes contain nothing on the subject of ‹disturbing causes› but the preceding fragment and that which follows. We would also refer the reader to the first chapter of the second series of ‹Sophisms›, entitled ‹Spoliation›.—«Editor.»
XIX. WAR
[102] See concluding part of chapter xi. ‹ante›.
[103] We forget this, when we propose the question, Is slave labour dearer or cheaper than free labour?
[104] See the author’s brochure, ‹Baccalauréat et Socialisme›.—«Editor.»
XX. RESPONSIBILITY
[105] . . . . . because I believe that it is under the direction of a superior impulse, because, Providence being unable to act in the social order except through the intervention of men’s interests and men’s wills, it is impossible that the natural resulting force of these interests, the common tendency of these wills, should be towards ultimate evil; for then we must conclude that it is not only man, or the human race, which proceeds onward towards error; but that God himself, being powerless or malevolent, urges on to evil His abortive creation. We believe, then, in liberty, because we believe in universal harmony, because we believe in God. Proclaiming in the name of faith, and formulating in the name of science, the Divine laws of the moral movement, living and pliant as these laws are, we spurn the narrow, sinister, unbending, and unalterable institutions which the blind leaders of the ignorant would substitute for this admirable mechanism. It would be absurd in the atheist to say, ‹laissez faire le hasard!›—seek not to control chance, or blind destiny. But, as believers, we have a right to say, seek not to control the order and justice of God—seek not to control the free action of the sovereign and infallible mover of all, or of that machinery of transmission which we call the human initiative. Liberty thus understood is no longer the anarchical deification of individualism. What we adore is above and beyond man who struggles; it is God who leads him.
We acknowledge, indeed, that man may err; yes, by the whole interval which separates a truth realized and established from one which is merely guessed at or suspected. But since man’s nature is to seek, his destiny is to find. Truth, be it observed, has harmonious relations, necessary affinities, not only with the constitution of the understanding and the instincts of the heart, but also with the whole physical and moral conditions of our existence; so that even when we fail to grasp it as ‹absolute truth›, even when it fails to recommend itself to our innate sympathies as ‹just›, or to our ideal aspirations as ‹beautiful›, it, nevertheless, at length contrives to find acceptance in its practical and unobjectionable aspect as ‹useful›.
Liberty, we know, may lead to evil. But evil has itself its mission. Assuredly God has not thrown it across our path as a stumbling-block. He has placed it, as it were, on each side of that path as a warning,—as a means of keeping us in the right road, or bringing us back to it.
Man’s will and inclinations, like inert molecules, have their law of gravitation. But, whilst things inanimate obey blindly their pre-existent and inevitable tendencies, in the case of beings indued with free will, the force of attraction and repulsion does not precede action; it springs from the voluntary determination which it seems to be waiting for, it is developed by the very act itself, and it reacts for or against the agent, by a progressive exertion of co-operation or resistance, which we term recompense or chastisement, pleasure or pain. If the direction of the will coincides with that of the general laws, if the act is ‹good›, happiness is the result. If it takes an opposite direction, if it is ‹bad›, something opposes or repels it; error gives rise to suffering, which is its remedy and its end. Thus, Evil is constantly opposed by Evil, and Good as constantly gives rise to Good. And we venture to say that, when seen from a higher point of view, the errors of free will are limited to certain oscillations, of a determinate extent, around a superior and necessary orbit; all persistent resistance, which would force this limit, tending only to destroy itself, without at all succeeding in disturbing the order of the sphere in which it moves.
This reactive force of co-operation or repulsion, which, by means of recompense and suffering, governs the orbit, at once voluntary and necessary, of the human race, this ‹law of gravitation of free beings› (of which Evil is only a necessary part) is distinguished by the terms Responsibility and Solidarity; the one brings back upon the individual; the other reflects and sends back on the social body the good or bad consequences of the act; the one applies to man as a solitary and self-governing individual; the other envelops him in an inevitable community of good and evil as a partial element, a dependent member, of a collective and imperishable being—man. ‹Responsibility› is the sanction of individual liberty, the foundation of the ‹rights› of man. ‹Solidarity› is the evidence of his social subordination, and his principle of duty. . . .
[‹A leaf of Bastiat’s MS. being awanting, I hope to be pardoned for thus endeavouring to continue the idea of this religious introduction.›]—R. F.
[106] Religion (‹religare›, to bind), that which connects the present life with the future, the living with the dead, time with eternity, the finite with the infinite, man with God.
[107] May we not say that Divine Justice, which is so incomprehensible when we consider the lot of individuals, becomes striking when we reflect on the destinies of nations? Each man’s life is a drama which is begun on one theatre and completed on another. But the same thing cannot be said of the life of nations. That instructive tragedy begins and ends upon earth. This is the reason why history becomes a holy lesson; it is the justice of Providence.—«De Custine’s» ‹La Russie›.
[108] Allusion to Socialist Utopias of the day.—«Translator.»
[109] “As to the doctrine of necessity, no one believes it. If a man should give me arguments that I do not see, though I could not answer them, should I believe that I do not see? . . . . All theory is against the freedom of the will; all experience for it. . . . . I ‹know› that I am free, and there’s an end on’t.” (‹Dr Johnson.›)—«Translator.»
[110] “Cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life: Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee. . . . In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, until thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.”—‹Gen.› iii. 17, 18, 19.
[111] The interesting developments which the author intended to present here by way of illustrations, and of which he indicated beforehand the character, he unfortunately did not live to write. The reader may supply the want by referring to chapter xvi. of this work, and likewise to chapters vii. and xi. of Bastiat’s pamphlet, ‹Ce qu’on voit et Ce qu’on ne voit pas›.—«Note of the Editor.»
[112] “For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves; which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another.”—‹Romans› ii. 14, 15. See also ‹Bishop Butler’s 3d Sermon, on Human Nature›: “Nothing,” says he, “can be more evident than that, ‹exclusive of revelation›, man cannot be considered as a creature left by his Maker to act at random, and live at large up to the extent of his natural power, as passion, humour, wilfulness, happen to carry him; which is the condition brute creatures are in. But that, ‹from his make, constitution, or nature, he is in the strictest and most proper sense a law to himself›. He hath the rule of right within. What is wanting is only that he honestly attend to it.”—«Butler’s» ‹Works›, vol. ii. p. 65.—«Translator.»
[113] The conclusion of this chapter is little more than a series of notes thrown together, without transitions or developments.—«Editor.»
XXI. SOLIDARITY
[114] This sketch terminates here abruptly; the ‹economic› view of the law of solidarity is not indicated. We may refer the reader to chapter x. and chapter xi. ‹ante›.
Moreover, the whole scope of this work on the Harmonies, the concordance of interests, and the grand maxims, “The prosperity of each is the prosperity of all—the prosperity of all is the prosperity of each,” etc., the accord between property and community, the services of capital, extension of the domain of the gratuitous, etc., are all developments in a utilitarian point of view of the very title of this chapter—Solidarity.—«Note of the Editor.»
XXII. SOCIAL MOTIVE FORCE
[115] “Poverty is the fruit of Political Economy. . . . Political Economy requires death to come to its aid; . . . it is the theory of instability and theft.”—«Proudhon», ‹Contradictions Économiques›, t. xi. p. 214. “If the people want bread, . . . it is the fault of Political Economy.”—‹Ibid.›
XXV. RELATIONS OF POLITICAL ECONOMY WITH MORALS, WITH POLITICS, WITH LEGISLATION
[116] The author has unfortunately left nothing on the subject of the four chapters with which he appears (‹see ante›, p. 30) to have intended to conclude the present work, except the following introduction to his projected chapter on the Relations of Political Economy with Religion.
The line which separates the field of Political Economy from the wider domains of Morals, Politics, and Legislation is perhaps by no writer more accurately marked than by Mr Senior in the admirable introduction to his article “Political Economy” in the ‹Encyclop. Metropolitana›.
“The questions, to what extent and under what circumstances the possession of wealth is, on the whole, beneficial or injurious to its possessor, or to the society of which he is a member? what distribution of wealth is most desirable in each different state of society? and what are the means by which any given country can facilitate such a distribution?—all these are questions of great interest and difficulty, but no more form part of the science of Political Economy, in the sense in which we use that term, than Navigation forms part of the science of Astronomy. The principles supplied by Political Economy are indeed necessary elements in their solution, but they are not the only or even the most important elements. The writer who pursues such investigations is, in fact, engaged on the great science of Legislation; a science which requires a knowledge of the general principles supplied by Political Economy, but differs from it essentially in its subject, its premises, and its conclusions. The subject of legislation is not wealth, but human welfare. Its premises are drawn from an infinite variety of phenomena, supported by evidence of every degree of strength, and authorizing conclusions deserving every degree of assent, from perfect confidence to bare suspicion. And its expounder is enabled, and even required, not merely to state certain general facts, but to urge the adoption or rejection of actual measures or trains of action.
“On the other hand, the subject treated by the Political Economist, using that term in the limited sense in which we apply it, is not happiness, but wealth; his premises consist of a very few general propositions, the result of observation or consciousness, and scarcely requiring proof or even formal statement, which almost every man, as soon as he hears them, admits as familiar to his thoughts, or at least as included in his previous knowledge; and his inferences are nearly as general, and, if he has reasoned correctly, as certain as his premises. Those which relate to the nature and the production of wealth are universally true; and though those which relate to the distribution of wealth are liable to be affected by the peculiar institutions of particular countries, in the cases, for instance, of slavery, legal monopolies, or poor laws, the natural state of things can be laid down as the general rule, and the anomalies produced by particular disturbing causes can be afterwards accounted for. But his conclusions, whatever be their generality and their truth, do not authorize him in adding a single syllable of advice. That privilege belongs to the writer or the statesman who has considered all the causes which may promote or impede the general welfare of those whom he addresses, not to the theorist who has considered only one, though among the most important, of those causes. The business of a Political Economist is neither to recommend nor to dissuade, but to state general principles which it is fatal to neglect, but neither advisable nor perhaps practicable to use as the sole, or even the principal, guides in the actual conduct of affairs. In the meantime, the duty of each individual writer is clear. Employed as he is upon a science in which error, or even ignorance, may be productive of such intense and such extensive mischief, he is bound, like a juryman, to give deliverance true according to the evidence, and to allow neither sympathy with indigence nor disgust at profusion or at avarice, neither reverence for existing institutions nor detestation of existing abuses—neither love of popularity nor of paradox, nor of system, to deter him from stating what he believes to be the facts, or from drawing from those facts what appear to him to be the legitimate conclusions. To decide in each case how far these conclusions are to be acted on belongs to the art of government, an art to which Political Economy is only one of many subservient sciences, which involves the consideration of motives, of which the desire for wealth is only one among many, and aims at objects to which the possession of wealth is only a subordinate means.”—«Translator.»
INDEX.
A.
‹Accumulation›, a circumstance of no account in Political Economy, page 169, ‹note›.
‹Air, Atmospheric›, has utility without having value, 137; but if pumped into a diving-bell, the service has value, 138.
‹Algeria›, usual rate of interest in, said to be 10 per cent., 302.
‹America, United States of›, population of, doubles, according to M. Moreau de Jonnès’s estimate, in 25 years, 404.
‹Aphorisms, the Two›, “Each for all, all for each”—“Each for himself, each by himself,” 339-346.
Opposed to each other if we regard the motive, not so if we look to results, 339.
No incompatibility in this last view between individualism and association, 340.
Men associate in obedience to self-interest, ‹ib.›
Difficulties attending a state of isolation lead naturally to association, 341.
As regards labour and exchanges, the principle “Each for himself” must be predominant, 342.
By following the rule each for himself, individual efforts act in the direction of each for all, 343.
Icarian expedition proceeded on the principle of all for each, 344, ‹note›.
Principles of Socialism and Communism refuted, 343, 344.
All desire monopolies and privileges, even the working classes, at their own expense, 345, 346.
B.
‹Baccalauréat et Socialisme›, a pamphlet by Bastiat against monopoly of university degrees, and too exclusive addiction to classical learning, 23.
‹Barter›, primitive form of exchange, direct or roundabout, 108.
When barter is effected by means of an intermediate commodity, it is called sale and purchase, 109.
Barter of two factors, 110.
Value resolves itself into a barter of services, 137.
‹Bastiat, Frédéric›, his birth, parentage, and education, p. 9.
His early friendship with M. Calmètes, ‹ib.›
Begins the study of Political Economy, 10.
Gives up commerce as a profession, ‹ib.›
His friendship with M. Coudroy, ‹ib.›
They study Philosophy and Political Economy together, ‹ib.›
Takes part in the Revolution of 1830, 11.
Bastiat publishes his first brochure in 1834, ‹ib.›
Becomes ‹Juge de Paix›, and a Member of the Council-General, ‹ib.›
Visits Spain, Portugal, and England, 12.
Writes ‹Le Fisc et la Vigne›, ‹ib.›
Publishes two other brochures in 1843 and 1844, ‹ib.›
Anecdote regarding unfounded Anglophobia, ‹ib.›
Sends his first contribution to the ‹Journal des Économistes›, 13.
Publishes ‹Cobden et la Ligue› in 1845, ‹ib.›
Letter to Mr Cobden quoted, ‹ib.›
Named a corresponding member of the Institute, 14.
Letter to M. Calmètes quoted, ‹ib.›
Visits Paris, and introduced to leading economists, 15.
Visits England in 1845, and makes the acquaintance of Cobden, Bright, and the other Corn-Law Leaguers, ‹ib.›
Letter to M. Coudroy quoted, 15, 16.
Bastiat complains of the hatred to England then prevalent in France, 16.
Settles in Paris, ‹ib.›
His appearance, as described by M. de Molinari and M. Reybaud, 17.
Letters to Cobden and Coudroy quoted, ‹ib.›
Conducts the ‹Libre-Échange› newspaper, 18.
His mode of life in Paris, ‹ib.›
Publishes the ‹Sophismes Économiques›, great success of that work, and extract from it, 18, 19, 20, 21.
Delivers a course of lectures on Political Economy, 21.
Is returned as a member of the Legislative Assembly, ‹ib.›
His daily occupations, 22.
His pamphlets against the Socialists, ‹Propriété et Loi›; ‹Propriété et Spoliation›; ‹Justice et Fraternité›; ‹Capital et Rente›; ‹Gratuité du Credit›; ‹Protectionisme et Communisme›, etc., published in 1848-49, ‹ib.›
Publishes ‹Baccalauréat et Socialisme›, and ‹Ce qu’on voit et ce qu’on ne voit pas›, in 1850, 23.
Extract from the latter, 24, 25.
Projects ‹Harmonies Économiques›, and letter to Mr Cobden on that subject quoted, 25.
Letter to M. Coudroy on the same subjects, ‹ib.›
His health begins to give way, 26, 27.
His account of the reception of the ‹Harmonies›, 27.
Notice of that work, 27, 28, 29.
List of chapters intended to complete the second volume of the ‹Harmonies›, 30, ‹note›.
Goes to Italy on account of his health, 30.
His letter to M. Coudroy from Rome, 31.
His last illness and death, 31, 32.
‹Bell, Sir Charles›, his work on the Hand quoted, 29, ‹note›.
‹Blanqui›, his opinions on landed property quoted, 255.
‹Bonald, M. de›, quoted, 152.
‹Brazil›, usual rate of interest in, said to be 20 per cent., 302.
‹Buchanan, D.›, his opinions on landed property quoted, 252.
‹Buret, M.›, his false theory on the relations of capitalist and labourer, 384.
‹Butler, Bishop›, his Sermons on Human Nature quoted, 478, ‹note›.
‹Byron, Lord›, quoted, 32.
C.
‹Cairnes, Professor›, quoted, 18.
‹Caisses de Retraite›, friendly accumulation societies to provide for old age, 372, ‹note›.
Such institutions satisfy the natural desire for stability and fixity, ‹ib.›
To succeed must proceed from the working classes themselves, without Government support or interference, 373.
Future of the working classes, 374.
‹Calmètes, M.›, the early friend of Bastiat, 9.
Letter to, quoted, 14.
‹Candlemakers’ Petition› quoted, 19.
‹Capital et Rente›, pamphlet by Bastiat against the Socialists, 22.
‹Capital›, in the beginning formed very slowly, 197.
Consists of tools, materials, and provisions, 198.
The man who furnishes capital renders a service, and is paid for that service, 199, 200.
The man who accords delay renders a service, and hence the legitimacy of interest, 203, 204.
Principle which governs the returns for capital, 206-211.
Progress of mankind coincides with rapid accumulation of capital, 210.
Capital has in itself a power of progression, 211.
Increase of capital is followed by increase of general prosperity, 212.
By increase of capital, the capitalist’s ‹absolute› share of product increased, his ‹relative› share diminished, while labourer’s share is increased both absolutely and relatively, ‹ib.›
Illustrations of this, 213-216.
Progress of civilisation tends to lower rate of interest, 302.
Rates in Brazil, Algeria, Spain, Italy, Germany, France, England, and Holland, ‹ib.›
Relations of capitalist and labourer, 383.
Erroneous notions on this subject most dangerous, 384.
Falsest theories abroad, ‹ib.›
Due to M. de Sismondi and M. Buret, ‹ib.›
Labourer’s share of product has a tendency to increase as capital increases, 385.
When exchange takes place between capital, or anterior labour, and present labour, it is not on the footing of their duration or intensity, but of their value, 387.
Anterior labour has a general tendency to become depreciated, 388, 389.
Presence of capital always beneficial to labourer, 390.
Groundless outcry against tyranny of capital, 391, 392.
‹Carey, Mr›, his theory of rent referred to, 274, ‹note by Translator›.
‹Ce qu’on voit et ce qu’on ne voit pas›, or Political Economy in one Lesson, pamphlet by Bastiat, quoted, 24.
Referred to, 478, ‹note›.
‹Châteaubriand›, represents civilisation and corruption of morals as marching abreast, 511, 512.
His ‹Mémoires d’Outre Tombe› quoted, 512.
‹Civil law terms› explained, 172, and ‹note›.
‹Cobden, Mr›, letter from, on the subject of Bastiat’s merits as an economist and writer, 4.
Triumph of free trade due to him rather than to Sir Robert Peel, 374.
His efforts for the suppression of war, 375.
‹Communists›, their erroneous views of landed property controverted, 155.
‹Competition›, no organization or form of association can be substituted for, 288.
Implies freedom from all constraint, 289.
Levels all factitious inequalities, 290.
Misunderstood by the Socialists, ‹ib.›
Value diminishes through the co-operation of natural forces, not of its own accord, but by the pressure exerted by competition, 291, 292.
In the absence of competition, society would be constituted on the principle of universal monopoly, ‹ib.›
Competition enables one country to participate in the natural advantages of another, 293.
Examples of this, 294, 299.
Inventions and discoveries become, through competition, the common and gratuitous patrimony of all, 299.
Mode in which this takes place, 300, 301.
Competition among capitalists reduces the price of commodities, 301, 302.
Progress of civilisation tends to lower the rate of interest, and this effected by competition, 302.
If wages are sometimes reduced by competition, the labourers, as consumers, profit by it, 303-307.
Competition tends to render services proportional to efforts, 306.
Laws of modern society too often cramp competition, 309, 310.
Competition essential to progress, and allied with human perfectibility, 313.
It approximates ranks, fortunes, and intelligence, 316.
Advantages from inventions, or from local situation, climate, etc., slip rapidly from hands of producers, and go to enlarge enjoyments of consumers, 333, 334.
Same thing holds of disadvantages, 334.
‹Condillac› quoted, 114, 107.
‹Considérant, M.›, his work on Socialism quoted, 62, ‹note›.
His opinions on landed property, 257-260.
‹Consumer›, every man may in turn be both producer and consumer, 324, 325.
The wishes and desires of consumers are those which are in harmony with the public interest, 325.
Consumers and producers should be left free to take care of their own interests, 326.
The effect of inventions and discoveries on the interests of consumers and producers represented by diagrams, 331, 332.
Advantages from inventions, or from local situation, climate, etc., slip rapidly from the hands of producers, and go to enlarge the enjoyments of consumers, 333, 334.
Same thing holds of disadvantages, 334.
All great economic effects must be regarded from the consumer’s point of view, ‹ib.›
Subordination of producer’s interests to those of consumer confirmed when viewed in connexion with morals, 335.
Consumer is alone responsible for morality or utility of production, 338.
Producer looks only to value, ‹ib.›
Consumer represents society, ‹ib.›
‹Consumption›, a term employed to designate the enjoyment to which utility gives rise, 323.
General prosperity is measured by consumption, and not by labour, 325.
Consumption the great end of Political Economy, 338.
‹Coudroy, Felix›, studies Philosophy and Political Economy along with Bastiat, 10.
Letter to, quoted, 15.
Another letter to, quoted, 26.
D.
‹Defoe, D.›, his Robinson Crusoe referred to, 101.
Illustration drawn from, 197.
‹Demand› determines all in connexion with production, 335.
‹Diamond›, has great value without appreciable utility, 139.
Value of one found accidentally and exchanged arises, not from the effort of the person who renders the service, but the effort saved to the one who receives it, 141, 142.
This a new principle not to be found in the works of economists, 141.
‹Disturbing Causes.› Political Economy sets out by assuming transactions to be free and voluntary, 446.
Liberty is harmony, 447.
Economists not optimists, 448, 449.
Errors of judgment one disturbing cause, 452, 453.
‹Division of Labour› admits of being viewed in a more general light than hitherto, 105.
‹Dunoyer, M.›, his work ‹Sur la Liberté du Travail› referred to and commended, 92.
E.
‹Economists› differ from the Socialists at the starting-point, 35, 36.
‹Efforts.› Wants, efforts, and satisfactions, 63-74.
Effort saved to the person who receives a service imparts value to the service rendered, 141, 142.
‹England›, population of, doubles in 43 years, 404.
‹L’État›, pamphlet by Bastiat defining the proper province of Government, 23.
‹Euler›, his calculation of the period in which population doubles itself, 407.
Applying this calculation to the facts stated by Moses, Hebrews who entered Egypt must have doubled in 14 years, ‹ib.›
‹Evil, Existence of.› Science has been retarded by being called on to deny the existence of evil, 504.
Socialists, while admitting individual suffering, deny social suffering, ‹ib.›
Their contradictions exposed, 504-507.
‹Exchange›, impossible to conceive society as existing without, 97.
A phenomenon peculiar to man, 101.
Has two manifestations, union of forces, and separation of occupations, 104.
Consists in exchange of services, ‹ib.›
Its influence on labour, 105.
Upon the co-operation of natural agents, 105.
Upon human powers and faculties, 107.
Upon capital, ‹ib.›
Progress of exchange, 108-111.
Primitive form of, barter, 108.
Barter direct and roundabout, 109.
Limits of exchange, 111.
An element in the problem of population which Malthus has neglected, 113.
Moral force of exchange, 116.
In consequence of exchange, our powers exceed our wants, ‹ib.›;
and the gain of each is the gain of all, 117.
Illusions to which exchange gives rise, 128-130.
Exchange imparts the idea of value, 135.
F.
‹Fénélon› quoted, 77.
‹Final Causes›, faith in, not unattended with danger to the mind of an inquirer, 397.
‹Fisc, le, et la Vigne›, pamphlet written by Bastiat in 1840, 12.
‹Florez Estrada›, his opinions on landed property quoted, 254.
‹Florian’s Fables› quoted, 135.
‹Force, Public›, should be confined to ensuring justice, liberty, and security, 121, 122.
‹France›, youth of, address to, 33.
Usual rate of interest in, said to be 4 per cent., 302.
Population of, doubles in 138 years, 401.
‹Friendly Societies›, have conferred immense benefits on the working classes, 368.
Admirable means of providing against sickness and old age, ‹ib.›
Liberty and non-interference of Government essential to ensure their success, 369.
This secures reciprocal surveillance, 369-373.
Marked success of these societies in England, 370-373.
This due to the non-interference of Government, 371.
G.
‹Garnier, M. Joseph›, his opinions on landed property quoted, 256.
‹Germany›, usual rate of interest in said to be 5 per cent., 302.
Population of, doubles in 76 years, 404.
‹Girardin, M. Saint-Marc›, quoted as to the influence of employments on the condition of nations, 455.
‹Gratuité du Credit›, pamphlet by Bastiat against Proudhon’s doctrine, in 1850, 22.
H.
‹Habit›, force of, as changing man’s wants, an essential element to be taken into account, 84.
Transforms desire into want, 85.
‹Harmonies Économiques› projected, and letters to Mr Cobden and M. Coudroy on that subject quoted, 25.
Bastiat’s account of the reception of that work, 27.
Notice of the ‹Harmonies›, 27, 28, 29.
List of chapters intended to complete 2d vol. of, 30, ‹note›.
‹Holland›, usual rate of interest in, said to be under 3 per cent., 302.
Population of, doubles in 100 years, 404.
I.
‹Icarie, voyage en›, Socialist work referred to, 205.
‹Institute›, Bastiat named a member of, 14.
‹Interest of Capital›, Proudhon’s error regarding, 158.
All the power of the Church unable to enforce prohibition of, 480.
‹Isolation›, in the state of, our wants exceed our powers, 98;
and the gain of one may be the loss of another, 117.
‹Italy›, usual rate of interest in, said to be 6 per cent., 302.
J.
‹Johnson, Dr›, his opinions on free will and necessity quoted, 473, ‹note›.
‹Journal des Économistes›, Bastiat’s first contribution to, 13.
‹Justice et Fraternité›, pamphlet by Bastiat against the Socialists, 22.
K.
‹Kepler› referred to, 68.
L.
‹Labour›, the assertion that all wealth comes from labour combated, 88.
Utility communicated by nature, by labour, and oftener by a combination of both, ‹ib.›
To produce utility, action of labour in an inverse ratio to that of nature, ‹ib.›
As used by Economists, a vague term, and more extended meaning given to it in this work, 92.
Distinction between productive and unproductive, has led to error, ‹ib.›
Distinction between productive and unproductive labour rejected, 156, 157.
‹Effort› a better term than labour, 158.
Labour cannot serve as a measure of value, 171.
Unskilled labour the best for making a comparison, ‹ib.›
In exchanging present for anterior labour, the advantage is on the side of present labour, 178.
The opposite phenomenon sometimes manifests itself, 179.
‹Laissez-faire›, doctrine of, explained, 48, 448, 449.
‹Lamennais, M. de›, his opinions on the principle of population combated, 408, 409.
‹Landed Property.› The idea of value gives rise to that of property, 249.
Confusion caused by Economists mistaking utility for value, 250.
Property represented as monopoly, 250, 251.
Is not a monopoly, 251.
Opinions of English Economists on this subject—Adam Smith quoted, 252;
Buchanan quoted, 252, 253;
Ricardo’s opinion, ‹ib.›;
M’Culloch’s views, 253;
Scrope and Senior quoted, ‹ib.›;
opinions of Mill and Malthus referred to, 254;
Scialoja and Florez Estrada quoted, ‹ib.›
French Economists—M. Say quoted, ‹ib.›;
Blanqui and J. Garnier quoted, 255, 256.
Opinions of Socialists and Communists—M. Considérant quoted, 257;
Proudhon quoted, 260.
These opinions controverted, 260-273.
Recapitulation, 273.
Bastiat has adopted the theory of Mr Carey on this subject, which should be taken with some modification, 274, ‹note by Translator›.
Land which has not been subjected to human action, destitute of value, 274.
Value resolves itself into the remuneration of anterior labour or capital, ‹ib.›
M. Considérant’s views reverted to, 278-280.
Productive powers of the soil have no independent value, 285.
Case of the South Australian Association referred to, ‹ib.›
Ameliorations which increase the value of land generally diminish the price of its produce, 347.
Explanation of this, 348, 349.
Theory of the progressive dearness of means of subsistence erroneous, 351, ‹note›.
‹Lauderdale, Lord›, his ‹Inquiry into the Nature and Origin of Public Wealth› quoted, 187, ‹note›.
‹Legislation›, relations of Political Economy with, 513, ‹note›.
‹Liberty›, solution of social problem to be found in, 34.
‹Libre-Échange›, newspaper, conducted by Bastiat, 18.
M.
‹M’Culloch›, his opinion on landed property quoted, 253.
‹Machiavel› quoted, 56.
‹Malthus› on population, referred to, 113.
Vindicated from violent attacks made on him, 397.
Authors of those attacks writers of no reputation and grossly ignorant, ‹ib.›
Malthus feared that, with so great a power of reproduction, mankind would come to exceed what the earth could maintain but for prudence and foresight, 398.
An expression which occurred in the first edition of his Essay on Population, to the effect that population increases in a geometrical, and food in an arithmetical progression, gave rise to misrepresentation, ‹ib.›
Made a handle of by Godwin and Sismondi, and was suppressed in all subsequent editions, 399.
Attacks continued notwithstanding, the fiercest proceeding from men who confessed they had not read Malthus’s work, ‹ib.›
The laws of population cannot be comprised in a brief aphorism or formula, 400.
Were known before Malthus wrote, 402.
Objections to his theory illogical, 405.
Arguments against his geometrical progression not conclusive, ‹ib.›
Wrong in adopting the limit of twenty-five years, although that holds good in America, 406, 407.
Malthus attributes more force to repressive than preventive check, 410.
His true formula is, not that population tends to keep on a level with, but to go beyond, the means of subsistence, 416.
‹Maudit Argent!› pamphlet by Bastiat exposing popular errors arising from confounding capital with money, and money with inconvertible paper, 23.
‹Measure of Value›, the ‹quadrature› of Political Economy, 170.
Absolute measure a chimera, ‹ib.›
Labour cannot serve as a measure, 171.
‹Mémoire sur la question Vinicole›, pamphlet published by Bastiat in 1843, 12.
‹Mémoire sur la répartition de l’impôt foncier›, pamphlet by Bastiat, written in 1844, 12.
‹Metals, Precious›, not a perfect standard of value, their own value fluctuating, 151, 152.
‹Métayage›, system of, explained, 61, ‹note›.
‹Molière›, his ‹Malade Imaginaire› quoted, 104.
‹Molinari, M. de›, his description of Bastiat’s appearance quoted, 17.
‹Money›, an intermediate commodity which facilitates the exchange of services, but does not change the principle of value, 142.
‹Montaigne› quoted, 97.
‹Moral qualities› must be taken into account with reference to production of wealth, 93, 94.
‹Morality of Wealth›, considerations on, 193, 194.
‹Morals›, relations of Political Economy with, 513, ‹note›.
‹Moreau de Jonnès›, his calculations of the period of doubling the population in various countries, 403.
‹Moses›, his account of the multiplication of Hebrews who entered Egypt, 407.
N.
‹Newton, Sir Isaac›, referred to, 62.
O.
‹Organization›, natural and artificial, 47.
P.
‹Paix et Liberté›, pamphlet by Bastiat against excessive taxation and overgrown military and naval armaments, 22.
‹Pamphlets› by Bastiat, ‹Réflexions concernant les Douanes›, and ‹Le Fisc et la Vigne›, published 1840, 11, 12.
‹Mémoire sur la question Vinicole› appeared in 1843, and ‹Mémoire sur la répartition de l’impôt foncier› in 1844, ‹ib.›
Pamphlets against the Socialists, ‹Propriété et Loi›, ‹Propriété et Spoliation›, ‹Justice et Fraternité›, ‹Capital et Rente›, ‹Gratuité du Credit›, ‹Protectionisme et Communisme›, etc., published in 1848-9, 22.
‹Maudit Argent!› extract from, 23.
‹Baccalauréat et Socialisme›, and ‹Ce qu’on voit et ce qu’on ne voit pas›, published in 1850, ‹ib.›;
extracts from the latter, 24, 25.
‹Peel, Sir R.›, triumph of Free Trade due not so much to him as to Mr Cobden, 374.
‹Perfectibility›, means of realizing, to be found in law of Responsibility, 509.
Liberty the essence of progress, ‹ib.›
Formidable obstacles to progress, 509, 510.
But no ground for despair, 510.
Châteaubriand represents civilisation and corruption of morals as marching abreast, 511, 512.
‹Petty, Sir W.›, cited, 186.
‹Phalanstère›, a Socialist work, referred to, 64, 205, ‹note›.
‹Physiocrates›, French Economists of the school of Quesnay, 153, ‹note›.
Represented all labour not worked up in a material commodity as sterile, ‹ib.›
‹Political Economy›, limits of the science marked out, 70, 71.
May be defined the theory of exchange, 73;
or the theory of value, ‹ib.›
Takes for granted the existence of evil and suffering, 76.
Many errors in, arise from regarding human wants as a fixed quantity, 79.
Not one of the exact sciences, 82, 83.
First principles of, involved in difficulties by erroneous definitions of value, 136.
A science of observation and exposition, 502.
Contrast between Political Economy and Socialism, ‹ib.›
Relations of Political Economy with Morals, Politics, and Legislation, 513, ‹note›.
‹Population›, laws of, cannot be comprised in a brief formula, 400.
Vindication of Malthus, and of the general doctrine of his Essay on Population, 397, 400.
If, as wealth increases, the number among whom it is to be divided increases more rapidly, absolute wealth may be greater, but individual wealth will be less, 401.
Malthus has reduced the principle to the formula that population tends to keep on a level with the means of subsistence, 402.
This principle not new; every writer on such subjects since Aristotle has proclaimed it, ‹ib.›
Enunciated by Sir James Steuart thirty years before the appearance of the Essay on Population, ‹ib.›, ‹note›.
Nature has taken greater care of species than of individuals, in order to insure the perpetuity of races, 402.
Instances of this in the vegetable kingdom, ‹ib.›;
and in animals whose life is of a type more akin to vegetables, 402, 403.
Advancing in scale of social life, means of reproduction bestowed with greater parsimony, ‹ib.›
In the human species, reproductive faculty less powerful than in any other, ‹ib.›
But, physically, man does not escape the law of a tendency to multiplication beyond the limits of space and nourishment, ‹ib.›
Difference between the physiological power of multiplying and actual multiplication, ‹ib.›
Malthus inquired in what period of time mankind would double, if space and food were unlimited, 404.
But as this hypothesis is never realized, theoretical must be shorter than actual period, ‹ib.›
Different rates of increase in different countries according to estimate of M. Moreau de Jonnès, 403.
Such differences not the result of physiological causes, but of external obstacles, 404.
New sources of local wealth lead invariably to increase of population, ‹ib.›
Objections made to the theory of Malthus very illogical, ‹ib.›
Nor are the arguments against his geometrical progression more conclusive, ‹ib.›
Fixed on twenty-five years as the minimum period in which population may double itself, because this actually takes place in America, 405.
Malthus merely asserts that it has a ‹tendency› to increase in a geometrical progression, ‹ib.›
That this virtual power of multiplication will be restrained is just what Malthus contends for, ‹ib.›
Restrained by preventive and repressive checks, 406.
He was wrong in adopting the limit of twenty-five years, although it holds good in America, 406, 407.
This mixing up of the virtual and the real has exposed him to be misunderstood and misrepresented, 406.
Calculation by Euler of period of doubling, 407.
Applying Euler’s calculation to the facts stated by Moses, Hebrews who entered Egypt must have doubled in 14 years, ‹ib.›
Absolute power of multiplication limited by obstacles, 408.
Vegetable life limited by want of space and territorial fertility—animals destitute of foresight, by want of food, 409.
Opinions of M. de Lamennais on this subject combated, ‹ib.›
Law of limitation as regards man manifests itself by the double action of foresight and destruction, 410.
The term moral restraint, used by Malthus, does not give us a just idea of the domain of foresight, ‹ib.›
Other obstacles besides fear of poverty aid the action of the law of limitation in its preventive shape, 410, 411.
Marriages on an average are probably later than they otherwise would be by eight years in consequence of these preventive obstacles, 411.
Supposed advice of an old clergyman regarding too early marriages, 411, 412.
Man’s perfectibility an important element in resolving the problem of population, 413.
Malthus, by neglecting this, has attributed less force to the preventive than to the repressive check, ‹ib.›
For the expression, “means of subsistence,” Say has substituted one more exact, namely, “means of existence,” ‹ib.›
Man’s constant effort to better his condition exercises control over increase of numbers, 414.
Better circumstances induce greater foresight, ‹ib.›
In countries like China or Ireland, when rice and potatoes fail, there is nothing to fall back on, and repressive check comes into operation, 416.
The true formula of Malthus is, not that population tends to keep on a level with, but to go beyond, the means of subsistence, ‹ib.›
Foresight prevents this in the human race, ‹ib.›
Recapitulation, 416, 417.
Population tends to redundancy most among unskilled labourers, 420.
Marriages are less improvident among the higher classes, 421.
‹Fermage› less efficacious in interposing a preventive obstacle to increase of population than ‹Métayage›, 421, 422.
These terms explained, 421. ‹note›.
Almsgiving tends to destroy foresight, ‹ib.›
Improvement in labourers’ cottages in England, 422.
Rate, of wages in one country influences the rate in others, 423.
Population is in itself a force, for increase of productive power results from density of population, 424, ‹note›.
‹Producer›, every member of society may in turn be both producer and consumer, 324, 325.
Producers and consumers should be left free to take care of their own interests, 327.
The effect of inventions and discoveries on the interest of producers and consumers illustrated by diagrams, 331, 332.
Advantages, from inventions, or from local situation, climate, etc., slip rapidly from the hands of producers, and go to enlarge enjoyments of consumers, 333, 334.
Same thing holds of disadvantages, 334.
Producer has nothing to do with the utility of what is produced, only with its value, 336.
The utility concerns the demander, ‹ib.›
It is in the intention of the consumer that moral or immoral enjoyment is to be discovered, 338.
‹Production› is to modify and combine substances, not to create, them, 100.
Production and consumption not the best terms to designate services rendered and received, 323.
Production is employed to designate whatever confers utility, ‹ib.›
‹Progress› annihilates value by substituting gratuitous for onerous utility, 73.
‹Prolétaire›, definition of the term as used by Bastiat, 35, ‹note›.
‹Property and Community›, two ideas correlative to ideas of onerosity and gratuitousness, 223.
Gifts of nature, the domain of community—human efforts, domain of property, ‹ib.›
Principle of property, 226-229.
Illustrations of this, 229-232.
As society advances, property tends to recede, and community to advance, 232.
Illustrations of this, 233-236.
Vindication of property, 238-240.
Distinction between community and communism, 245-248.
‹Property.› See ‹Landed Property›.
‹Propriété et Loi›, pamphlet by Bastiat against the Socialists, 22.
‹Propriété et Spoliation›, pamphlet by Bastiat, 22.
‹Protection›, a phase of communism, 323.
This demonstrated by Bastiat in pamphlet entitled ‹Protectionisme et Communisme›, 22.
‹Proudhon›, his erroneous view of landed property, 155, 233, 260.
Error as to interest of capital, 158.
His view of wealth and value confuted, 188-190.
Doctrine of mutuality of services, 224.
‹Providence›, laws of, harmonious, 43.
Q.
‹Quesnay›, French Economists of his school known as the ‹Physiocrates›, 153, ‹note›.
Represented all labour not worked up in a material commodity as sterile, ‹ib.›
R.
‹Réflexions concernant les Douanes›, pamphlet written by Bastiat in 1840, 11.
‹Religion› derived from ‹religare›, to bind, 468.
False religions may be known from their obstructing progress, 480.
No form of religion ought to be repressed by law, 481, 482.
Human mind generally begins by discovery of final causes, 514.
Habit blinds us to final causes, ‹ib.›
When we discover efficient, we are too apt to deny final causes, 515-517.
‹Rent.› See ‹Landed Property›.
Ameliorations which increase the value of land generally diminish the price of its produce, 347.
Explanation of this, 348, 349.
Author intended to adopt the theory of Mr Carey in opposition to that of Ricardo, 347, ‹note›.
Theory of the progressive dearness of means of subsistence erroneous, 351, ‹note›.
‹Responsibility›, belief in God the leading idea of this work, 465.
Differs from the writings of Socialists, ‹ib.›
The author’s proposed introduction continued by editor, 465, 466, ‹note›.
Laws of Responsibility and Solidarity act together, 466;
and should be viewed in their ‹ensemble›, but for the method required by science, ‹ib.›
Evil and suffering exist everywhere, in the individual and in society, 467, 468.
The social body not subject to inevitable decline, 468.
De Custine’s remarks on this subject quoted, ‹ib.›, ‹note›.
Society, like the human body, has a ‹vis medicatrix›, 469.
Men approximate to a common level which is constantly rising, ‹ib.›
Liberty implies possible error, and error possible evil, ‹ib.›
Socialists’ errors on this subject combated, 470, 471.
Political Economy is not concerned to explain origin of evil, 471.
Sufficient that evil and suffering exist, and have their mission, 472.
Existence of free will proved by our consciousness of possessing it, 472, 473.
Dr Johnson’s opinion on this subject quoted, 473, ‹note›.
Every action gives rise to consequences, of which some fall back on the agent, and others on his family or on society, hence responsibility and solidarity, 474.
Responsibility applies to the person who acts, ‹ib.›
We cannot even conceive of man as exempt from suffering, 474, 475.
Our notions of sensibility and existence are inseparable, 475.
Faith the necessary complement of our destinies, ‹ib.›
Without sensibility we should be constantly exposed to death, ‹ib.›
If, of the consequences following on action, the majority are bad and hurtful, such action tends to limit and restrain itself, 476.
Ignorance gives rise to bad habits and bad laws, knowledge and experience to the reverse, ‹ib.›
Mission of evil is to destroy its own cause and stimulate progress, 477.
Responsibility has three sanctions,—natural, religious, and legal, 478.
The first of these is fundamental, ‹ib.›
Is an act vicious because revelation declares it so, or does revelation declare it so because its consequences are bad? ‹ib.›
Bishop Butler’s Sermons on Human Nature quoted, 478, ‹note›.
If we had a religion which forbade acts proved to be useful, it could not be maintained, 479.
All the power of the Church insufficient to enforce prohibition of interest, 480.
False religions known from their obstructing advancement and progress, ‹ib.›
Legal sanction should only give force and efficacy to natural sanction, ‹ib.›
Where natural repression sufficient, legal repression should be avoided, 481.
Law acts by means of force, and should not be applied to repress any particular form of religion, 481, 482.
Other instances of the hurtful interposition of law, 482-485.
Evils to which foundling hospitals have given rise, 485-487.
Sense of responsibility capable of improvement, 487.
Its development may be aided by female intervention, ‹ib.›
‹Revolution of February›, remarks on its consequences, 123-128.
‹Revue des Deux Mondes› quoted, 16.
‹Reybaud, M. Louis›, his notice of Bastiat referred to, 16.
His description of Bastiat’s appearance quoted, 17.
‹Ricardo›, his theory referred to, 38.
Wrong in representing the principle of value as residing in labour, 136.
Gave to the word wealth the sense of utility; Say, that of value, 181.
His opinions on landed property quoted, 252, 253.
‹Robinson Crusoe›, illustrations drawn from, 101, 197, 198.
‹Rousseau, J. J.›, quoted, 48.
His ‹Contrat Social› commented on, 56;
quoted, 57-60;
referred to, 77.
Recognises the elasticity of human wants, 81.
Admits existence of evil, 85, ‹note›;
referred to, 94.
His doctrine controverted, 97.
To exalt the state of nature, makes happiness to consist in privation, 102.
Represents solidarity as of legislative creation, 488, 489.
‹Russia›, population of, doubles in 43 years, 404.
De Custine’s work on Russia quoted, 468, ‹note›.
S.
‹Saint-Chamans, M. de›, referred to and quoted, 184.
His doctrine confuted, 185, 186.
‹Sale and Purchase› is barter by means of an intermediate commodity, 109.
Both resolve themselves into an exchange of services, 110.
‹Satisfaction of Consumers›, the sole end of production, 94, 95, 96.
The term satisfaction preferred to the word consumption, as more general, ‹ib.›
‹Saving› is not to accumulate commodities, but to interpose an interval between time of rendering and receiving services, 393.
The demand for labour and the rise of wages depend on augmentation of capital, ‹ib.›
Difficulties on the subject of saving removed by reference to the principle of value, 391.
To interpose delay between services rendered and received is itself to render a service; it has value, and hence the origin of interest, 395.
To give credit is to render a service, which also has value, 396.
Saving not necessarily injurious to industry, ‹ib.›
It does not imply actual hoarding, ‹ib.›
‹Say, J. B.›, quoted, 90.
Referred to, 100.
Judicious observation on barter—‹troc à deux facteurs›, 110.
Wrong in representing value as residing in utility, 136.
Quoted, 142.
Erroneous view of landed property, 154.
Is wrong in representing value as founded on utility, 161-164.
Discards Smith’s distinction between productive and unproductive labour, 173.
Gave to the word Wealth the sense of Value; Ricardo that of Utility, 181.
His definition of natural wealth quoted, 190.
His opinions on landed property quoted, 255.
Has substituted the more exact expression “means of existence” for the expression “means of subsistence,” used by Malthus in his Essay on Population, 413.
Wrong in representing taxation as in all cases an evil, 426, ‹notes›.
‹Scialoja›, his opinions on landed property quoted, 254.
‹Scrope›, his erroneous view of landed property, 253.
‹Senior›, his erroneous view of rent, 154.
Founds value on rarity, remarks on this doctrine, 167.
His opinions on landed property quoted, 253.
On the relations of Political Economy with Morals, Politics, and Legislation, 513, ‹note›.
‹Services›, human transactions, when free, resolve themselves into exchange of, 43.
Value consists in comparative appreciation of, 73.
Service is effort in one man, while the want and satisfaction are in another, 74.
Exchange of, forms the subject of Political Economy, 133.
Effort saved to the person who receives a service imparts value to the service rendered, 140-142.
‹Service› a better term than ‹Labour›, 158.
Every product which has value implies a service, but every service does not imply a product; value, therefore, is in service, 174.
When value passes from service to product, it undergoes, in product, all the risks and chances to which the service itself is subject, 176.
Service is rendered by the man who furnishes capital, 199, 200.
Private and Public service, 425.
Where want so general as to be a public want, may be provided for by the community at large, 426.
This does not alter essential principles of exchange, ‹ib.›;
but modifies them, 429.
Process explained, ‹ib.›
Sophism that money paid to public functionaries comes back like rain on the citizens exposed, 430.
Public services always extinguish private services of the same kind, ‹ib.›
Public services leave no discretion to individuals, 432.
Example of this, ‹ib.›, ‹note›.
Take away control over services both rendered and received, 433.
Extinguish sense of responsibility, 434.
Give rise to public discontent, 434, 435.
Exclude competition, 435, 436.
Question is, what services should remain in the domain of private exertion, what in that of public? 436.
Government action is legitimate only where intervention of force legitimate, 437;
and legitimate only in the case of defence of liberty and property, ‹ib.›;
and to ensure the predominance of justice, 438, 439.
When the State goes beyond this, it destroys liberty and property, which are placed under its safeguard, ‹ib.›
Province of Government confined to what involves public security, taking care of common property, and levying contributions for public service, 440.
Circumscribing the province of Government does not enfeeble, but strengthen it, 441.
Example of the United States, 442.
Slavery and protection in America active causes of revolution, ‹ib.›
Revolution of February, remarks on, 444.
‹Sismondi, M. de›, referred to, 184.
His doctrine on wealth and value controverted, 187.
His false theory on the relations of capitalist and labourer, 384.
‹Smith, Adam›, wrong in representing value as residing only in material substances, 91.
His distinction between roductive and unproductive labour has led to errors, ‹ib.›
His account of the influence of exchange on labour commended, 105.
Wrong in representing the principle of value as residing in materiality and durability, 136.
Quoted and controverted on the subject of value, 156.
Opinions on landed property quoted, 252.
‹Social Motive Force› described and explained, 495-503.
Personal interest is the social motive force which leads us to shun evil and seek after good, 495.
Attraction towards happiness and repulsion from pain, the mainspring of the social mechanism, 496.
This impulsive force is under direction of our intelligence, and intelligence may err, ‹ib.›
The laws of responsibility and solidarity lend assistance to repress error and injustice, 497.
Attempts of the Socialists to substitute devotion and self-sacrifice for personal interest, as the social motive force, combated, 498, 499.
Socialist works and writers referred to, 500-503.
‹Social Problem›, demands solution, 33, 34.
Solution to be found in liberty, not in constraint, 35.
The man who demonstrates that the good of each tends to the good of all, as the good of all tends to the good of each, will have resolved the social problem, 118.
‹Socialists› differ from Economists in regarding man’s interests as antagonistic, 35.
Socialist works referred to, 64, and ‹note›.
‹Society›, mechanism of, 48.
Gives the humblest mechanic more in one day than he could himself produce in many ages, ‹ib.›
Study of, the business of Political Economy, 51.
In social state our powers exceed our wants, 98.
‹Solidarity› is collective responsibility, 488.
Not of legislative creation, as represented by Rousseau, 488, 489.
The philosophers of the last century did not believe in it, 489.
Instances in which individuals suffer from the errors or faults of others—this is the law of solidarity, 489, 490.
Responsibility is not exclusively personal, but is shared and divided, 490.
Society, in turn, suffers from the errors or faults of individuals, and the law of solidarity comes to check such actions, 491.
Solidarity, like responsibility, is a progressive force, and resolves itself into repercussive or reflected responsibility, ‹ib.›
To enable those who suffer from another’s acts to react against them, connexion between cause and effect should be known, 492.
Not always known, from the circumstance that the first effect may seem good, though all the subsequent consequences are bad, ‹ib.›
Example of this in case of war, ‹ib.›
In the case of slavery, of religious errors, and of prohibition, ‹ib.›
Human law should coincide with the natural law, and organize reaction, 493.
Example of this in case of violence, which provokes vengeance, law steps in to repress it with regularity and certainty, 493, 494.
Economic view of the law of solidarity not indicated by the author in this chapter, 494, ‹note›.
‹Sophismes Économiques›, great success of that work, and extract from it, 18;
referred to, 124, ‹note›, and 325.
‹Spain›, usual rate of interest in, said to be 8 per cent., 302.
Population of, doubles in 106 years, 404.
‹Spoliation› and oppression, the sources of all social dissonances, 318-322.
‹Statistics, Experimental›, what meant by, 353-360.
‹Stewart, Sir James›, took the same view of the principle of population which Malthus more formally enunciated, thirty years before the appearance of the Essay on Population, 402, ‹note›.
‹Storch›, his erroneous view of the principle of value, 136.
His doctrine that value depends on the judgment we form of utility confuted, 168;
quoted, 191.
‹Supply› often virtually precedes demand, 335.
This arises from foresight of producer, ‹ib.›
Intensity of demand pre-existent, 335.
‹Switzerland›, population of, doubles in 227 years, 404.
T.
‹Taxation›, not necessarily a loss, as represented by Say, 426, 427, ‹note›.
‹Tracy, M. de›, quoted, 106, 107.
‹Turkey›, population of, doubles in 555 years, 403.
U.
‹Utility›, onerous and gratuitous, 69.
By substituting gratuitous for onerous utility, progress annihilates value, ‹ib.›
Gratuitous, tends to take the place of onerous utility, 90, 91.
Mode in which this is effected, 91, 92.
Attributing value to utility has led to many errors, 164-167.
The term Production employed to designate whatever confers utility, and Consumption to designate the enjoyment to which that utility gives rise, 323.
What renders service to the masses is utility alone, and value is not the measure of it, 325;
but in the case of the individual, value is the measure of it, 325, 326.
General utility and onerous utility represented by lines of unequal length; gratuitous utility, by indefinite lines, 328.
Utility formerly onerous, now become gratuitous, also represented by lines, 330.
V.
‹Value› consists in the comparative appreciation of reciprocal services, 73.
Does not reside in material substances, as represented by Smith, 91.
Vague definition of, 108.
Value represents effort, 109.
Theory of value, 131.
As essential to Political Economy as numeration is to arithmetic, ‹ib.›
Value has a tendency to diminish in relation to utility, 132.
Does not extend to the co-operation of nature, but is restricted exclusively to human efforts, 134.
A state of isolation excludes the idea of value, ‹ib.›
Exchange imparts the notion of value, 135.
Value is the relation of two services exchanged, ‹ib.›
Not necessarily proportionate to intensity of efforts, 138.
Arises in some cases, not from the effort of the person who renders the service, but from the effort saved to the person who receives it, 140, 141.
This is a new principle not to be found in any other work on Political Economy, 141.
Intervention of money does not change the principle, 142, 143.
Value does not reside in commodities, but in services, 143.
Examples of various kinds of services, all possessed of value, 147.
Limits within which value oscillates, ‹ib.›;
other examples, 148, 149.
The precious metals not a perfect standard of value, as their own value fluctuates, 151, 152.
Value not an attribute of matter, 153.
This an error of the Physiocrates and of Adam Smith, and has given rise to the distinction between productive and unproductive labour, 153, 154.
Value not a thing having independent existence, but a relation, 158.
Value and Labour are not proportional, 159, 160, ‹note›.
Measure of value the ‹quadrature› of Political Economy, 170.
Fixity cannot be found in a mean term composed of variable elements, ‹ib.›
Absolute measure of, a chimera, ‹ib.›
Value being supposed to be in the material product, and not in the service, has led to Smith’s error as to unproductive labour, 172.
When value passes from service to product, it undergoes, in product, all the risks and chances to which the service itself is subject, 176.
Prevailing tendency of value incorporated with a commodity is to fall, 178.
Value is the measure of the utility of services rendered to the individual, not of those rendered to the masses, 325, 326.
W.
‹Wages.› Men are always in search of something fixed, 352.
Hence the great desire for government offices, 353.
Fixity favoured by two circumstances, 354.
Illustrations drawn from the principle of fire insurance, 354-357.
Remuneration by wages has the principle of fixity, so much sought after, 357.
Opinions of the Socialists on this subject controverted, 357, 358.
Wages, their origin, form, and effects, 358.
Labour may be remunerated either by share of its product or by fixed wages, 359.
Dependence not caused by form of remuneration, but by precarious situation of labourer, ‹ib.›
No men worse off than fishermen and vine-dressers, though they have the benefits of association, 359, 360.
Results of labour applied to the chase, fishing, or agriculture very uncertain, ‹ib.›
To obviate this, a fixed unconditional bargain preferred, 360.
This is not to destroy, but improve, the principle of association, ‹ib.›
Risks appreciated by means of experimental statistics, ‹ib.›
Remuneration by share of produce characteristic of times of barbarism, 361.
Fixity of remuneration a step of progress, ‹ib.›
Association not thereby dissolved, ‹ib.›
Capital and labour both take a share of risk till it can be estimated by experience, ‹ib.›
This state of things gives place to a bargain which ensure unity of direction and fixity of situation, 362.
The capitalist may take risk, paying fixed wages, or labourer may take risk, paying a fixed interest—still there is association, 362, 363.
Wages have nothing degrading in them any more than interest, 363.
The one is the remuneration of present, the other of anterior labour, ‹ib.›
Such stipulations are the cause and the manifestation of progress, ‹ib.›
Socialist errors on this subject confuted, 364, 365.
Friendly Societies admirable means of providing against sickness and old age, 368.
Have conferred immense benefits on the working classes, ‹ib.›
‹Caisses de Retraite›, Friendly Accumulation Societies, 371-378.
Anterior labour, or capital, must necessarily have more security than present labour, 377-379.
Future of the working classes—tendency to become capitalists, 379-383.
Progress of the working classes between 1750 and 1850, 381.
Relations of the capitalist and labourer, 383.
Erroneous notions on this subject most dangerous, 384.
Falsest theories abroad, ‹ib.›
Due to M. de Sismondi and M. Buret, ‹ib.›
Labourer’s share of product has a tendency to increase as capital increases, 385.
When exchange takes place between capital, or anterior labour, and present labour, it is not on the footing of their duration or intensity, but of their value, 387.
Anterior labour has a general tendency to become depreciated, 388, 389.
Presence of capital always beneficial to labourer, 390.
Groundless outcry against tyranny of capital, 391, 392.
‹Wants›, efforts, and satisfactions, constitute the domain of Political Economy, 69-74.
Wants of man, enumeration of, 75-77.
Moral and material, 77.
Not a fixed quantity, but progressive and expansive, 79, 80.
Rousseau recognises their elasticity, 81.
In isolation, wants exceed powers; in the social state, powers exceed wants, 98.
Man has more wants than any other living being, 99.
‹War.› Principal thing which imparts to nations their distinctive character is the manner in which they provide for their subsistence, 454.
Labour, although little noticed by historians, held as important a place among the ancients as it does with us, 457.
War, spoliation, marked difference in the character of a nation which lives by, 458.
It presupposes production, ‹ib.›
Spoliation in the shape of war has its root in selfishness, 459.
Personal interest gives rise to harmony, but there are disturbing causes, 460.
Labour is in itself a good, independent of its results, but we do not desire it for its own sake, ‹ib.›
Man, being placed between two evils, want and labour, seeks to get rid of both, 461.
Spoliation then presents itself as a solution of the problem, ‹ib.›
War a waste of human power, ‹ib.›
And the spoliator does not get quit of labour, ‹ib.›
Checks production by the insecurity it creates, 462.
Contrasts between the producer and spoliator, ‹ib.›
War has been a widespread evil, 462, 463.
Interrupts human progress, 463.
How the warlike spirit is propagated, ‹ib.›
How war ends, 464.
‹Water› has utility without possessing value, 138;
but if brought from a distance by another, the service has value, 138, 139.
‹Wealth›, natural and social, 73;
actual or relative, 180.
Relative wealth is measured by value, not utility, 181.
Ricardo gave to the word Wealth the sense of utility; Say, that of value, ‹ib.›
Effective wealth, the aggregate utilities which labour, aided by natural agents, places within our reach, 192.
Relative wealth, proportional share of each in the general riches, determined by value, ‹ib.›
Morality of, 193, 194.
Motive which leads to acquisition of, natural, and consequently moral, 193.
Desire to better our circumstances also moral, ‹ib.›;
but if we seek to become rich by injustice, this immoral, ‹ib.›
Y.
‹Youth of France›, address to, 33.
EDINBURGH: PRINTED BY OLIVER AND BOYD.
TRANSCRIBER’S ENDNOTE
The words "Égalitaires" and "Egalitaires" are both retained as printed.
Page 64: "instals" was changed to "installs".
Page 68: "Keppler" changed to "Kepler", to agree with the corresponding index entry.
Page 108: "appearence" to "appearance".
Page 215: "that times comes," to "that time comes,".
Page 264: "Proudon" changed to "Proudhon".
Page 266: added full stop after "encountered the same difficulty".
Page 272: added full stop after "into the high regions of the atmosphere".
Page 276: added colon after "pay for two kinds of labour".
Page 284: added full stop after "in the case of agricultural products".
Page 385: added full stop after "or in the product".
Page 488: Chapter number "XXL" to "XXI".
Page 493: "concide" to "coincide".
Page 500: "sort of gravitation:" to "sort of gravitation;".
Page 513: beginning double quote mark added to second paragraph of the long quotation in footnote 116.
Page 521: "Lammennais" to "Lamennais".