OCR Text |
Show so DEFINITIONS OF WEAL'fH . [ CH. I. Adan1 Smith, who considers all the material objects which are useful to man as wealth, n1eans by productive labour, that labour vvhich realizes itself either in the production or increased value of such material objects. This n1ode of applying the tern1, productive labour, to the labour ,~rhich is productive of \vealth, however wealth may be defined, is obviously useful, and, \\rith a view to clearness and consistency in the use of the tern1s of political economy, should al\ vays be adhered to. But as some \Vriters have not used the terms in this \vay, and as those who have been disposed so to use then1 have not agreed in their definitions of \vealth, it \vas to be expected that the ter1n productive labour should give rise to great differences of opinion. The doctrine laid clo\vn by J\dam Smith on this subject has been controverted by two opposite parties, one of \Vhich has itnputed to him an incorrect and unphilosophical extension of the term productive to objects \vhich it ought not to include, and others have accused hi1n of a similar 'vant of precision for attempting to establish a distinction bet\veen different sorts of labour \vhere no distinction is to be fountl. In proceeding to give n1y reasons for adopting the opinion of Adam Smith, I shall first endeavour to shew that some such classification of the different kinds of labour is really called for in an inquiry into the nature and causes of the 'vealth of nations, and that a considerable degree of confusion \vould be introduced into the science of political SEC. II.] AND PRODUCTIVE LABOUR. Sl economy by an attempt to proceed without it. We shall be less disposed to be disturbed by plausible ca viis, or even by a few just exceptions to the complete accuracy of a definition, if 've are convinced that the want of precision 'vhich is imputed to it, is beyond con1parison less in amount and importance than the 'vant of precision which 'vould result from the rejection of it. In the firs.t place then, it 'vill readily be granted that as capital, in whatever way it may be defined, is absolutely necessary to the division of labour and the use of machinery, its po\verful influence on the progress of national \vealth must be considered as incontrovertibly established. But in tracing the cause of the different effects of produce en1ployed as capital, and of produce consun1ed as revenue, "ve shall find that it arises from the different kinds of labour· maintained by each; and in speaking, therefore, and treating of capital, it seen1s quite necessary to have some· tern1 for the kind of labour which it generally employs, in contradistinction to the kind of labour oo -ene-rally etnployed by revenue, in order to explain i.t s nature and operation, and the causes of its Increase. Secondly, it is stated by Adan1 Smith, and it nn1st be allo\ved to be stated justly, that the produce 'vhich is annually saved is as regularly consun1ed as that which is annually spent, but that it is consumed by a different set of people. If this be the case, and if saving be allowed to be the imnlediate cause of the increase of capital, it must |