There is one sort of labour which adds to the value of the subject upon which it is bestowed;

there is another which has no such effect.

The former as it produces a value, may be called productive, the latter, unproductive labour. {Some French authors of great learning and ingenuity have used those words in a different sense.

In the last chapter of the fourth book, I shall endeavour to shew that their sense is an improper one.}

Thus the labour of a manufacturer adds generally to the value of the materials which he works upon, that of his own maintenance, and of his master’s profit.

The labour of a menial servant, on the contrary, adds to the value of nothing.

Though the manufacturer has his wages advanced to him by his master, he in reality costs him no expense, the value of those wages being generally restored, together with a profit, in the improved value of the subject upon which his labour is bestowed.

But the maintenance of a menial servant never is restored.

A man grows rich by employing a multitude of manufacturers;

he grows poor by maintaining a multitude or menial servants.

The labour of the latter, however, has its value, and deserves its reward as well as that of the former.

But the labour of the manufacturer fixes and realizes itself in some particular subject or vendible commodity, which lasts for some time at least after that labour is past.

It is, as it were, a certain quantity of labour stocked and stored up, to be employed, if necessary, upon some other occasion.

That subject, or, what is the same thing, the price of that subject, can afterwards, if necessary, put into motion a quantity of labour equal to that which had originally produced it.

The labour of the menial servant, on the contrary, does not fix or realize itself in any particular subject or vendible commodity.

His services generally perish in the very instant of their performance, and seldom leave any trace of value behind them, for which an equal quantity of service could afterwards be procured.

 The labour of some of the most respectable orders in the society is, like that of menial servants, unproductive of any value, and does not fix or realize itself in any permanent subject, or vendible commodity, which endures after that labour is past, and for which an equal quantity of labour could afterwards be procured.

The sovereign, for example, with all the officers both of justice and war who serve under him, the whole army and navy, are unproductive labourers.

They are the servants of the public, and are maintained by a part of the annual produce of the industry of other people.

Their service, how honourable, how useful, or how necessary soever, produces nothing for which an equal quantity of service can afterwards be procured.

The protection, security, and defence, of the commonwealth, the effect of their labour this year, will not purchase its protection, security, and defence, for the year to come.

In the same class must be ranked, some both of the gravest and most important, and some of the most frivolous professions;

churchmen, lawyers, physicians, men of letters of all kinds;

players, buffoons, musicians, opera-singers, opera-dancers, etc.

The labour of the meanest of these has a certain value, regulated by the very same principles which regulate that of every other sort of labour;

and that of the noblest and most useful, produces nothing which could afterwards purchase or procure an equal quantity of labour.

Like the declamation of the actor, the harangue of the orator, or the tune of the musician, the work of all of them perishes in the very instant of its production.

 Both productive and unproductive labourers, and those who do not labour at all, are all equally maintained by the annual produce of the land and labour of the country.

This produce, how great soever, can never be infinite, but must have certain limits.

According, therefore, as a smaller or greater proportion of it is in any one year employed in maintaining unproductive hands, the more in the one case, and the less in the other, will remain for the productive, and the next year’s produce will be greater or smaller accordingly;

the whole annual produce, if we except the spontaneous productions of the earth, being the effect of productive labour.

 Though the whole annual produce of the land and labour of every country is no doubt ultimately destined for supplying the consumption of its inhabitants, and for procuring a revenue to them;

yet when it first comes either from the ground, or from the hands of the productive labourers, it naturally divides itself into two parts.

One of them, and frequently the largest, is, in the first place, destined for replacing a capital, or for renewing the provisions, materials, and finished work, which had been withdrawn from a capital;

the other for constituting a revenue either to the owner of this capital, as the profit of his stock, or to some other person, as the rent of his land.

Thus, of the produce of land, one part replaces the capital of the farmer;

the other pays his profit and the rent of the landlord;

and thus constitutes a revenue both to the owner of this capital, as the profits of his stock, and to some other person as the rent of his land.

Of the produce of a great manufactory, in the same manner, one part, and that always the largest, replaces the capital of the undertaker of the work;

the other pays his profit, and thus constitutes a revenue to the owner of this capital.

 That part of the annual produce of the land and labour of any country which replaces a capital, never is immediately employed to maintain any but productive hands.

It pays the wages of productive labour only.

That which is immediately destined for constituting a revenue, either as profit or as rent, may maintain indifferently either productive or unproductive hands.

 Whatever part of his stock a man employs as a capital, he always expects it to be replaced to him with a profit.

He employs it, therefore, in maintaining productive hands only;

and after having served in the function of a capital to him, it constitutes a revenue to them.

Whenever he employs any part of it in maintaining unproductive hands of any kind, that part is from that moment withdrawn from his capital, and placed in his stock reserved for immediate consumption.

 Unproductive labourers, and those who do not labour at all, are all maintained by revenue;

either, first, by that part of the annual produce which is originally destined for constituting a revenue to some particular persons, either as the rent of land, or as the profits of stock;

or, secondly, by that part which, though originally destined for replacing a capital, and for maintaining productive labourers only, yet when it comes into their hands, whatever part of it is over and above their necessary subsistence, may be employed in maintaining indifferently either productive or unproductive hands.

Thus, not only the great landlord or the rich merchant, but even the common workman, if his wages are considerable, may maintain a menial servant;

or he may sometimes go to a play or a puppet-show, and so contribute his share towards maintaining one set of unproductive labourers;

or he may pay some taxes, and thus help to maintain another set, more honourable and useful, indeed, but equally unproductive.

No part of the annual produce, however, which had been originally destined to replace a capital, is ever directed towards maintaining unproductive hands, till after it has put into motion its full complement of productive labour, or all that it could put into motion in the way in which it was employed.

The workman must have earned his wages by work done, before he can employ any part of them in this manner.

That part, too, is generally but a small one.

It is his spare revenue only, of which productive labourers have seldom a great deal.

They generally have some, however;

and in the payment of taxes, the greatness of their number may compensate, in some measure, the smallness of their contribution.

The rent of land and the profits of stock are everywhere, therefore, the principal sources from which unproductive hands derive their subsistence.

These are the two sorts of revenue of which the owners have generally most to spare.

They might both maintain indifferently, either productive or unproductive hands.

They seem, however, to have some predilection for the latter.

The expense of a great lord feeds generally more idle than industrious people.

The rich merchant, though with his capital he maintains industrious people only, yet by his expense, that is, by the employment of his revenue, he feeds commonly the very same sort as the great lord.

 The proportion, therefore, between the productive and unproductive hands, depends very much in every country upon the proportion between that part of the annual produce, which, as soon as it comes either from the ground, or from the hands of the productive labourers, is destined for replacing a capital, and that which is destined for constituting a revenue, either as rent or as profit.

This proportion is very different in rich from what it is in poor countries.

 Thus, at present, in the opulent countries of Europe, a very large, frequently the largest, portion of the produce of the land, is destined for replacing the capital of the rich and independent farmer;

the other for paying his profits, and the rent of the landlord.

But anciently, during the prevalency of the feudal government, a very small portion of the produce was sufficient to replace the capital employed in cultivation.

It consisted commonly in a few wretched cattle, maintained altogether by the spontaneous produce of uncultivated land, and which might, therefore, be considered as a part of that spontaneous produce.

It generally, too, belonged to the landlord, and was by him advanced to the occupiers of the land.

All the rest of the produce properly belonged to him too, either as rent for his land, or as profit upon this paltry capital.

The occupiers of land were generally bond-men, whose persons and effects were equally his property.

Those who were not bond-men were tenants at will;

and though the rent which they paid was often nominally little more than a quit-rent, it really amounted to the whole produce of the land.

Their lord could at all times command their labour in peace and their service in war.

Though they lived at a distance from his house, they were equally dependent upon him as his retainers who lived in it.

But the whole produce of the land undoubtedly belongs to him, who can dispose of the labour and service of all those whom it maintains.

In the present state of Europe, the share of the landlord seldom exceeds a third, sometimes not a fourth part of the whole produce of the land.

The rent of land, however, in all the improved parts of the country, has been tripled and quadrupled since those ancient times;

and this third or fourth part of the annual produce is, it seems, three or four times greater than the whole had been before.

In the progress of improvement, rent, though it increases in proportion to the extent, diminishes in proportion to the produce of the land.

 In the opulent countries of Europe, great capitals are at present employed in trade and manufactures.

In the ancient state, the little trade that was stirring, and the few homely and coarse manufactures that were carried on, required but very small capitals.

These, however, must have yielded very large profits.

The rate of interest was nowhere less than ten per cent.

and their profits must have been sufficient to afford this great interest.

At present, the rate of interest, in the improved parts of Europe, is nowhere higher than six per cent.; and in some of the most improved, it is so low as four, three, and two per cent.

Though that part of the revenue of the inhabitants which is derived from the profits of stock, is always much greater in rich than in poor countries, it is because the stock is much greater;

in proportion to the stock, the profits are generally much less.

 That part of the annual produce, therefore, which, as soon as it comes either from the ground, or from the hands of the productive labourers, is destined for replacing a capital, is not only much greater in rich than in poor countries, but bears a much greater proportion to that which is immediately destined for constituting a revenue either as rent or as profit.

The funds destined for the maintenance of productive labour are not only much greater in the former than in the latter, but bear a much greater proportion to those which, though they may be employed to maintain either productive or unproductive hands, have generally a predilection for the latter.

 The proportion between those different funds necessarily determines in every country the general character of the inhabitants as to industry or idleness.

We are more industrious than our forefathers, because, in the present times, the funds destined for the maintenance of industry are much greater in proportion to those which are likely to be employed in the maintenance of idleness, than they were two or three centuries ago.

Our ancestors were idle for want of a sufficient encouragement to industry.

It is better, says the proverb, to play for nothing, than to work for nothing.

In mercantile and manufacturing towns, where the inferior ranks of people are chiefly maintained by the employment of capital, they are in general industrious, sober, and thriving;

as in many English, and in most Dutch towns.

In those towns which are principally supported by the constant or occasional residence of a court, and in which the inferior ranks of people are chiefly maintained by the spending of revenue, they are in general idle, dissolute, and poor;

as at Rome, Versailles, Compeigne, and Fontainbleau.

If you except Rouen and Bourdeaux, there is little trade or industry in any of the parliament towns of France; and the inferior ranks of people, being chiefly maintained by the expense of the members of the courts of justice, and of those who come to plead before them, are in general idle and poor.

The great trade of Rouen and Bourdeaux seems to be altogether the effect of their situation.

Rouen is necessarily the entrepot of almost all the goods which are brought either from foreign countries, or from the maritime provinces of France, for the consumption of the great city of Paris.

Bourdeaux is, in the same manner, the entrepot of the wines which grow upon the banks of the Garronne, and of the rivers which run into it, one of the richest wine countries in the world, and which seems to produce the wine fittest for exportation, or best suited to the taste of foreign nations.

Such advantageous situations necessarily attract a great capital by the great employment which they afford it;

and the employment of this capital is the cause of the industry of those two cities.

In the other parliament towns of France, very little more capital seems to be employed than what is necessary for supplying their own consumption;

that is, little more than the smallest capital which can be employed in them.

The same thing may be said of Paris, Madrid, and Vienna.

Of those three cities, Paris is by far the most industrious, but Paris itself is the principal market of all the manufactures established at Paris, and its own consumption is the principal object of all the trade which it carries on.

London, Lisbon, and Copenhagen, are, perhaps, the only three cities in Europe, which are both the constant residence of a court, and can at the same time be considered as trading cities, or as cities which trade not only for their own consumption, but for that of other cities and countries.

The situation of all the three is extremely advantageous, and naturally fits them to be the entrepots of a great part of the goods destined for the consumption of distant places.

In a city where a great revenue is spent, to employ with advantage a capital for any other purpose than for supplying the consumption of that city, is probably more difficult than in one in which the inferior ranks of people have no other maintenance but what they derive from the employment of such a capital.

The idleness of the greater part of the people who are maintained by the expense of revenue, corrupts, it is probable, the industry of those who ought to be maintained by the employment of capital, and renders it less advantageous to employ a capital there than in other places.

There was little trade or industry in Edinburgh before the Union.

When the Scotch parliament was no longer to be assembled in it, when it ceased to be the necessary residence of the principal nobility and gentry of Scotland, it became a city of some trade and industry.

It still continues, however, to be the residence of the principal courts of justice in Scotland, of the boards of customs and excise, etc.

A considerable revenue, therefore, still continues to be spent in it.

In trade and industry, it is much inferior to Glasgow, of which the inhabitants are chiefly maintained by the employment of capital.

The inhabitants of a large village, it has sometimes been observed, after having made considerable progress in manufactures, have become idle and poor, in consequence of a great lord’s having taken up his residence in their neighbourhood.

 The proportion between capital and revenue, therefore, seems everywhere to regulate the proportion between industry and idleness

Wherever capital predominates, industry prevails;

wherever revenue, idleness.

Every increase or diminution of capital, therefore, naturally tends to increase or diminish the real quantity of industry, the number of productive hands, and consequently the exchangeable value of the annual produce of the land and labour of the country, the real wealth and revenue of all its inhabitants.

 Capitals are increased by parsimony, and diminished by prodigality and misconduct.

 Whatever a person saves from his revenue he adds to his capital, and either employs it himself in maintaining an additional number of productive hands, or enables some other person to do so, by lending it to him for an interest, that is, for a share of the profits.

As the capital of an individual can be increased only by what he saves from his annual revenue or his annual gains, so the capital of a society, which is the same with that of all the individuals who compose it, can be increased only in the same manner.

 Parsimony, and not industry, is the immediate cause of the increase of capital.

Industry, indeed, provides the subject which parsimony accumulates;

but whatever industry might acquire, if parsimony did not save and store up, the capital would never be the greater.

 Parsimony, by increasing the fund which is destined for the maintenance of productive hands, tends to increase the number of those hands whose labour adds to the value of the subject upon which it is bestowed.

It tends, therefore, to increase the exchangeable value of the annual produce of the land and labour of the country.

It puts into motion an additional quantity of industry, which gives an additional value to the annual produce.

 What is annually saved, is as regularly consumed as what is annually spent, and nearly in the same time too: but it is consumed by a different set of people.

That portion of his revenue which a rich man annually spends, is, in most cases, consumed by idle guests and menial servants, who leave nothing behind them in return for their consumption.

That portion which he annually saves, as, for the sake of the profit, it is immediately employed as a capital, is consumed in the same manner, and nearly in the same time too, but by a different set of people: by labourers, manufacturers, and artificers, who reproduce, with a profit, the value of their annual consumption.

His revenue, we shall suppose, is paid him in money.

Had he spent the whole, the food, clothing, and lodging, which the whole could have purchased, would have been distributed among the former set of people.

By saving a part of it, as that part is, for the sake of the profit, immediately employed as a capital, either by himself or by some other person, the food, clothing, and lodging, which may be purchased with it, are necessarily reserved for the latter.

The consumption is the same, but the consumers are different.

 By what a frugal man annually saves, he not only affords maintenance to an additional number of productive hands, for that of the ensuing year, but like the founder of a public work-house he establishes, as it were, a perpetual fund for the maintenance of an equal number in all times to come.

The perpetual allotment and destination of this fund, indeed, is not always guarded by any positive law, by any trust-right or deed of mortmain.

It is always guarded, however, by a very powerful principle, the plain and evident interest of every individual to whom any share of it shall ever belong.

No part of it can ever afterwards be employed to maintain any but productive hands, without an evident loss to the person who thus perverts it from its proper destination.

 The prodigal perverts it in this manner: By not confining his expense within his income, he encroaches upon his capital.

Like him who perverts the revenues of some pious foundation to profane purposes, he pays the wages of idleness with those funds which the frugality of his forefathers had, as it were, consecrated to the maintenance of industry.

By diminishing the funds destined for the employment of productive labour, he necessarily diminishes, so far as it depends upon him, the quantity of that labour which adds a value to the subject upon which it is bestowed, and, consequently, the value of the annual produce of the land and labour of the whole country, the real wealth and revenue of its inhabitants.

If the prodigality of some were not compensated by the frugality of others, the conduct of every prodigal, by feeding the idle with the bread of the industrious, would tend not only to beggar himself, but to impoverish his country.

 Though the expense of the prodigal should be altogether in home made, and no part of it in foreign commodities, its effect upon the productive funds of the society would still be the same.

Every year there would still be a certain quantity of food and clothing, which ought to have maintained productive, employed in maintaining unproductive hands.

Every year, therefore, there would still be some diminution in what would otherwise have been the value of the annual produce of the land and labour of the country.

 This expense, it may be said, indeed, not being in foreign goods, and not occasioning any exportation of gold and silver, the same quantity of money would remain in the country as before.

But if the quantity of food and clothing which were thus consumed by unproductive, had been distributed among productive hands, they would have reproduced, together with a profit, the full value of their consumption.

The same quantity of money would, in this case, equally have remained in the country, and there would, besides, have been a reproduction of an equal value of consumable goods.

There would have been two values instead of one.

 The same quantity of money, besides, can not long remain in any country in which the value of the annual produce diminishes.

The sole use of money is to circulate consumable goods.

By means of it, provisions, materials, and finished work, are bought and sold, and distributed to their proper consumers.

The quantity of money, therefore, which can be annually employed in any country, must be determined by the value of the consumable goods annually circulated within it.

These must consist, either in the immediate produce of the land and labour of the country itself, or in something which had been purchased with some part of that produce.

Their value, therefore, must diminish as the value of that produce diminishes, and along with it the quantity of money which can be employed in circulating them.

But the money which, by this annual diminution of produce, is annually thrown out of domestic circulation, will not be allowed to lie idle.

The interest of whoever possesses it requires that it should be employed;

but having no employment at home, it will, in spite of all laws and prohibitions, be sent abroad, and employed in purchasing consumable goods, which may be of some use at home.

Its annual exportation will, in this manner, continue for some time to add something to the annual consumption of the country beyond the value of its own annual produce.

What in the days of its prosperity had been saved from that annual produce, and employed in purchasing gold and silver, will contribute, for some little time, to support its consumption in adversity.

The exportation of gold and silver is, in this case, not the cause, but the effect of its declension, and may even, for some little time, alleviate the misery of that declension.

 The quantity of money, on the contrary, must in every country naturally increase as the value of the annual produce increases.

The value of the consumable goods annually circulated within the society being greater, will require a greater quantity of money to circulate them.

A part of the increased produce, therefore, will naturally be employed in purchasing, wherever it is to be had, the additional quantity of gold and silver necessary for circulating the rest.

The increase of those metals will, in this case, be the effect, not the cause, of the public prosperity.

Gold and silver are purchased everywhere in the same manner.

The food, clothing, and lodging, the revenue and maintenance, of all those whose labour or stock is employed in bringing them from the mine to the market, is the price paid for them in Peru as well as in England.

The country which has this price to pay, will never belong without the quantity of those metals which it has occasion for;

and no country will ever long retain a quantity which it has no occasion for.

 Whatever, therefore, we may imagine the real wealth and revenue of a country to consist in, whether in the value of the annual produce of its land and labour, as plain reason seems to dictate, or in the quantity of the precious metals which circulate within it, as vulgar prejudices suppose;

in either view of the matter, every prodigal appears to be a public enemy, and every frugal man a public benefactor.

 The effects of misconduct are often the same as those of prodigality.

Every injudicious and unsuccessful project in agriculture, mines, fisheries, trade, or manufactures, tends in the same manner to diminish the funds destined for the maintenance of productive labour.

In every such project, though the capital is consumed by productive hands only, yet as, by the injudicious manner in which they are employed, they do not reproduce the full value of their consumption, there must always be some diminution in what would otherwise have been the productive funds of the society.

 It can seldom happen, indeed, that the circumstances of a great nation can be much affected either by the prodigality or misconduct of individuals;

the profusion or imprudence of some being always more than compensated by the frugality and good conduct of others.

 With regard to profusion, the principle which prompts to expense is the passion for present enjoyment;

which, though sometimes violent and very difficult to be restrained, is in general only momentary and occasional.

But the principle which prompts to save, is the desire of bettering our condition;

a desire which, though generally calm and dispassionate, comes with us from the womb, and never leaves us till we go into the grave.

In the whole interval which separates those two moments, there is scarce, perhaps, a single instance, in which any man is so perfectly and completely satisfied with his situation, as to be without any wish of alteration or improvement of any kind.

An augmentation of fortune is the means by which the greater part of men propose and wish to better their condition.

It is the means the most vulgar and the most obvious;

and the most likely way of augmenting their fortune, is to save and accumulate some part of what they acquire, either regularly and annually, or upon some extraordinary occasion.

Though the principle of expense, therefore, prevails in almost all men upon some occasions, and in some men upon almost all occasions;

yet in the greater part of men, taking the whole course of their life at an average, the principle of frugality seems not only to predominate, but to predominate very greatly.

 With regard to misconduct, the number of prudent and successful undertakings is everywhere much greater than that of injudicious and unsuccessful ones.

After all our complaints of the frequency of bankruptcies, the unhappy men who fall into this misfortune, make but a very small part of the whole number engaged in trade, and all other sorts of business;

not much more, perhaps, than one in a thousand.

Bankruptcy is, perhaps, the greatest and most humiliating calamity which can befal an innocent man.

The greater part of men, therefore, are sufficiently careful to avoid it.

Some, indeed, do not avoid it;

as some do not avoid the gallows.

 Great nations are never impoverished by private, though they sometimes are by public prodigality and misconduct.

The whole, or almost the whole public revenue is, in most countries, employed in maintaining unproductive hands.

Such are the people who compose a numerous and splendid court, a great ecclesiastical establishment, great fleets and armies, who in time of peace produce nothing, and in time of war acquire nothing which can compensate the expense of maintaining them, even while the war lasts.

Such people, as they themselves produce nothing, are all maintained by the produce of other men’s labour.

When multiplied, therefore, to an unnecessary number, they may in a particular year consume so great a share of this produce, as not to leave a sufficiency for maintaining the productive labourers, who should reproduce it next year.

The next year’s produce, therefore, will be less than that of the foregoing;

and if the same disorder should continue, that of the third year will be still less than that of the second.

Those unproductive hands who should be maintained by a part only of the spare revenue of the people, may consume so great a share of their whole revenue, and thereby oblige so great a number to encroach upon their capitals, upon the funds destined for the maintenance of productive labour, that all the frugality and good conduct of individuals may not be able to compensate the waste and degradation of produce occasioned by this violent and forced encroachment.

 This frugality and good conduct, however, is, upon most occasions, it appears from experience, sufficient to compensate, not only the private prodigality and misconduct of individuals, but the public extravagance of government.

The uniform, constant, and uninterrupted effort of every man to better his condition, the principle from which public and national, as well as private opulence is originally derived, is frequently powerful enough to maintain the natural progress of things towards improvement, in spite both of the extravagance of government, and of the greatest errors of administration.

Like the unknown principle of animal life, it frequently restores health and vigour to the constitution, in spite not only of the disease, but of the absurd prescriptions of the doctor.

 The annual produce of the land and labour of any nation can be increased in its value by no other means, but by increasing either the number of its productive labourers, or the productive powers of those labourers who had before been employed.

The number of its productive labourers, it is evident, can never be much increased, but in consequence of an increase of capital, or of the funds destined for maintaining them.

The productive powers of the same number of labourers cannot be increased, but in consequence either of some addition and improvement to those machines and instruments which facilitate and abridge labour, or of more proper division and distribution of employment.

In either case, an additional capital is almost always required.

It is by means of an additional capital only, that the undertaker of any work can either provide his workmen with better machinery, or make a more proper distribution of employment among them.

When the work to be done consists of a number of parts, to keep every man constantly employed in one way, requires a much greater capital than where every man is occasionally employed in every different part of the work.

When we compare, therefore, the state of a nation at two different periods, and find that the annual produce of its land and labour is evidently greater at the latter than at the former, that its lands are better cultivated, its manufactures more numerous and more flourishing, and its trade more extensive;

we may be assured that its capital must have increased during the interval between those two periods, and that more must have been added to it by the good conduct of some, than had been taken from it either by the private misconduct of others, or by the public extravagance of government.

But we shall find this to have been the case of almost all nations, in all tolerably quiet and peaceable times, even of those who have not enjoyed the most prudent and parsimonious governments.

To form a right judgment of it, indeed, we must compare the state of the country at periods somewhat distant from one another.

The progress is frequently so gradual, that, at near periods, the improvement is not only not sensible, but, from the declension either of certain branches of industry, or of certain districts of the country, things which sometimes happen, though the country in general is in great prosperity, there frequently arises a suspicion, that the riches and industry of the whole are decaying.

 The annual produce of the land and labour of England, for example, is certainly much greater than it was a little more than a century ago, at the restoration of Charles II.

Though at present few people, I believe, doubt of this, yet during this period five years have seldom passed away, in which some book or pamphlet has not been published, written, too, with such abilities as to gain some authority with the public, and pretending to demonstrate that the wealth of the nation was fast declining;

that the country was depopulated, agriculture neglected, manufactures decaying, and trade undone.

Nor have these publications been all party pamphlets, the wretched offspring of falsehood and venality.

Many of them have been written by very candid and very intelligent people, who wrote nothing but what they believed, and for no other reason but because they believed it.

 The annual produce of the land and labour of England, again, was certainly much greater at the Restoration than we can suppose it to have been about a hundred years before, at the accession of Elizabeth.

At this period, too, we have all reason to believe, the country was much more advanced in improvement, than it had been about a century before, towards the close of the dissensions between the houses of York and Lancaster.

Even then it was, probably, in a better condition than it had been at the Norman conquest: and at the Norman conquest, than during the confusion of the Saxon heptarchy.

Even at this early period, it was certainly a more improved country than at the invasion of Julius Caesar, when its inhabitants were nearly in the same state with the savages in North America.

 In each of those periods, however, there was not only much private and public profusion, many expensive and unnecessary wars, great perversion of the annual produce from maintaining productive to maintain unproductive hands;

but sometimes, in the confusion of civil discord, such absolute waste and destruction of stock, as might be supposed, not only to retard, as it certainly did, the natural accumulation of riches, but to have left the country, at the end of the period, poorer than at the beginning.

Thus, in the happiest and most fortunate period of them all, that which has passed since the Restoration, how many disorders and misfortunes have occurred, which, could they have been foreseen, not only the impoverishment, but the total ruin of the country would have been expected from them?

The fire and the plague of London, the two Dutch wars, the disorders of the revolution, the war in Ireland, the four expensive French wars of 1688, 1701, 1742, and 1756, together with the two rebellions of 1715 and 1745.

In the course of the four French wars, the nation has contracted more than £145,000,000 of debt, over and above all the other extraordinary annual expense which they occasioned;

so that the whole cannot be computed at less than £200,000,000.

So great a share of the annual produce of the land and labour of the country, has, since the Revolution, been employed upon different occasions, in maintaining an extraordinary number of unproductive hands.

But had not those wars given this particular direction to so large a capital, the greater part of it would naturally have been employed in maintaining productive hands, whose labour would have replaced, with a profit, the whole value of their consumption.

The value of the annual produce of the land and labour of the country would have been considerably increased by it every year, and every years increase would have augmented still more that of the following year.

More houses would have been built, more lands would have been improved, and those which had been improved before would have been better cultivated;

more manufactures would have been established, and those which had been established before would have been more extended;

and to what height the real wealth and revenue of the country might by this time have been raised, it is not perhaps very easy even to imagine.

 But though the profusion of government must undoubtedly have retarded the natural progress of England towards wealth and improvement, it has not been able to stop it.

The annual produce of its land and labour is undoubtedly much greater at present than it was either at the Restoration or at the Revolution.

The capital, therefore, annually employed in cultivating this land, and in maintaining this labour, must likewise be much greater.

In the midst of all the exactions of government, this capital has been silently and gradually accumulated by the private frugality and good conduct of individuals, by their universal, continual, and uninterrupted effort to better their own condition.

It is this effort, protected by law, and allowed by liberty to exert itself in the manner that is most advantageous, which has maintained the progress of England towards opulence and improvement in almost all former times, and which, it is to be hoped, will do so in all future times.

England, however, as it has never been blessed with a very parsimonious government, so parsimony has at no time been the characteristic virtue of its inhabitants.

It is the highest impertinence and presumption, therefore, in kings and ministers to pretend to watch over the economy of private people, and to restrain their expense, either by sumptuary laws, or by prohibiting the importation of foreign luxuries.

They are themselves always, and without any exception, the greatest spendthrifts in the society.

Let them look well after their own expense, and they may safely trust private people with theirs.

If their own extravagance does not ruin the state, that of the subject never will.

 As frugality increases, and prodigality diminishes, the public capital, so the conduct of those whose expense just equals their revenue, without either accumulating or encroaching, neither increases nor diminishes it.

Some modes of expense, however, seem to contribute more to the growth of public opulence than others.

 The revenue of an individual may be spent, either in things which are consumed immediately, and in which one day’s expense can neither alleviate nor support that of another;

or it may be spent in things mere durable, which can therefore be accumulated, and in which every day’s expense may, as he chooses, either alleviate, or support and heighten, the effect of that of the following day.

A man of fortune, for example, may either spend his revenue in a profuse and sumptuous table, and in maintaining a great number of menial servants, and a multitude of dogs and horses;

or, contenting himself with a frugal table, and few attendants, he may lay out the greater part of it in adorning his house or his country villa, in useful or ornamental buildings, in useful or ornamental furniture, in collecting books, statues, pictures;

or in things more frivolous, jewels, baubles, ingenious trinkets of different kinds;

or, what is most trifling of all, in amassing a great wardrobe of fine clothes, like the favourite and minister of a great prince who died a few years ago.

Were two men of equal fortune to spend their revenue, the one chiefly in the one way, the other in the other, the magnificence of the person whose expense had been chiefly in durable commodities, would be continually increasing, every day’s expense contributing something to support and heighten the effect of that of the following day;

that of the other, on the contrary, would be no greater at the end of the period than at the beginning.

The former too would, at the end of the period, be the richer man of the two.

He would have a stock of goods of some kind or other, which, though it might not be worth all that it cost, would always be worth something.

No trace or vestige of the expense of the latter would remain, and the effects of ten or twenty years’ profusion would be as completely annihilated as if they had never existed.

 As the one mode of expense is more favourable than the other to the opulence of an individual, so is it likewise to that of a nation.

The houses, the furniture, the clothing of the rich, in a little time, become useful to the inferior and middling ranks of people.

They are able to purchase them when their superiors grow weary of them;

and the general accommodation of the whole people is thus gradually improved, when this mode of expense becomes universal among men of fortune.

In countries which have long been rich, you will frequently find the inferior ranks of people in possession both of houses and furniture perfectly good and entire, but of which neither the one could have been built, nor the other have been made for their use.

What was formerly a seat of the family of Seymour, is now an inn upon the Bath road.

The marriage-bed of James I. of Great Britain, which his queen brought with her from Denmark, as a present fit for a sovereign to make to a sovereign, was, a few years ago, the ornament of an alehouse at Dunfermline.

In some ancient cities, which either have been long stationary, or have gone somewhat to decay, you will sometimes scarce find a single house which could have been built for its present inhabitants.

If you go into those houses, too, you will frequently find many excellent, though antiquated pieces of furniture, which are still very fit for use, and which could as little have been made for them.

Noble palaces, magnificent villas, great collections of books, statues, pictures, and other curiosities, are frequently both an ornament and an honour, not only to the neighbourhood, but to the whole country to which they belong.

Versailles is an ornament and an honour to France, Stowe and Wilton to England.

Italy still continues to command some sort of veneration, by the number of monuments of this kind which it possesses, though the wealth which produced them has decayed, and though the genius which planned them seems to be extinguished, perhaps from not having the same employment.

 The expense, too, which is laid out in durable commodities, is favourable not only to accumulation, but to frugality.

If a person should at any time exceed in it, he can easily reform without exposing himself to the censure of the public.

To reduce very much the number of his servants, to reform his table from great profusion to great frugality, to lay down his equipage after he has once set it up, are changes which cannot escape the observation of his neighbours, and which are supposed to imply some acknowledgment of preceding bad conduct.

Few, therefore, of those who have once been so unfortunate as to launch out too far into this sort of expense, have afterwards the courage to reform, till ruin and bankruptcy oblige them.

But if a person has, at any time, been at too great an expense in building, in furniture, in books, or pictures, no imprudence can be inferred from his changing his conduct.

These are things in which further expense is frequently rendered unnecessary by former expense;

and when a person stops short, he appears to do so, not because he has exceeded his fortune, but because he has satisfied his fancy.

 The expense, besides, that is laid out in durable commodities, gives maintenance, commonly, to a greater number of people than that which is employed in the most profuse hospitality.

Of two or three hundred weight of provisions, which may sometimes be served up at a great festival, one half, perhaps, is thrown to the dunghill, and there is always a great deal wasted and abused.

But if the expense of this entertainment had been employed in setting to work masons, carpenters, upholsterers, mechanics, etc.

a quantity of provisions of equal value would have been distributed among a still greater number of people, who would have bought them in pennyworths and pound weights, and not have lost or thrown away a single ounce of them.

In the one way, besides, this expense maintains productive, in the other unproductive hands.

In the one way, therefore, it increases, in the other it does not increase the exchangeable value of the annual produce of the land and labour of the country.

 I would not, however, by all this, be understood to mean, that the one species of expense always betokens a more liberal or generous spirit than the other.

When a man of fortune spends his revenue chiefly in hospitality, he shares the greater part of it with his friends and companions;

but when he employs it in purchasing such durable commodities, he often spends the whole upon his own person, and gives nothing to any body without an equivalent.

The latter species of expense, therefore, especially when directed towards frivolous objects, the little ornaments of dress and furniture, jewels, trinkets, gew-gaws, frequently indicates, not only a trifling, but a base and selfish disposition.

All that I mean is, that the one sort of expense, as it always occasions some accumulation of valuable commodities, as it is more favourable to private frugality, and, consequently, to the increase of the public capital, and as it maintains productive rather than unproductive hands, conduces more than the other to the growth of public opulence.