have a clear addition to the wealth of the country, without the alloy or the deduction of any unproductive labourer having at all to do with it. It is thus we should imagine, that a thousand manufacturers of Æolian harps, must be regarded with all complacency by our economists, as undoubted contributors to the material produce, which, by their definition, is tantamount to the wealth of the nation. But should the demand be changed from inanimate to living music, and the thousand artificers be transformed, of consequence, into so many vocal performers-we must suppose, that at this transition a reduction of wealth has taken place, although all the labourers are as well maintained, and all the employers are better pleased than before. We have already stated, that a preacher of oral sermons is unproductive but that, should he publish a volume of written sermons, he forthwith stands out in the capacity of a productive labourer. In short, without regard to that which is nevertheless the real terminus ad quem of all trade and manufactures, even the enjoyment of consumers; and without regard to the reward or maintenance of those who are engaged in them, for the maintenance is in every way as liberal, whether they are employed in the capacity of productive or unproductive labourers-this definition proceeds on some mysterious virtue which is figured in residing in the mere vehicle of the enjoyment. Unless that vehicle be a piece of matter, wealth, and all the blessings of which the term is comprehensive, are conceived to be somehow impaired by it. In a word, they cannot conceive how wealth should be in

anything, unless it be a something which the hand can handie. Without this, all is unsubstantial in their eyes. And though, by one mode of expenditure, health, and security, and virtue, and education, and justice, and science, are purchased for the community, at the hands of so many unproductive labourers; yet if, by another mode of expenditure, other blessings, however inferior, but unlike to these, laid up in packages or bales of merchandise, are purchased from the hands of productive labourerseconomists there are, both in and out of parliament, whose whole philosophy would enjoin them a contempt for the airy nothings, and a longing appetency for the bales."

This argument is conclusive, in as far as it shows the fallacy of the distinction between productive and unproductive, as set forth by Adam Smith; and it is equally conclusive against the view of the subject taken by Professor McCulloch, who holds that such labour is unproductive as does not " occasion, either directly or indirectly, the production of the same quantity of equally valuable products with those that were expended in carrying them on. Nevertheless, some such distinction as that drawn by Adam Smith, appears to be the necessary consequence of a distinction between capital and revenue,-between the productive and unproductive consumption of stock.

All labour is productive of some advantage or enjoyment. A part of revenue gives occasion to labour, of which the result is tangible advantages; a part, to labour of which the result is not tangible, such as

the services of domestics, or physicians, or singers. Whether the product of such labour be tangible or not, the enjoyment is the same; and the distinction, therefore, between tangible and non-tangible, is of no sort of consequence. But all the labour to which the expenditure of revenue gives occasion, has for object, the enjoyment, and nothing but the enjoyment, of the owners of revenue. The products or results of that labour, are of a perishable nature; they are not intended, nor are they fit, to be used in producing similar results; they are intended, and they are fit, only to be enjoyed and consumed. They may, perhaps, be termed results for enjoyment, or unproductive results.

On the other hand, if no portion of stock were ever devoted to expenditure, if all stock were used as capital, labour would have to perform one function only maintained by capital, it would have to reproduce capital. In that case, all the results of labour would be intended, and would be fit for producing similar results. But when a portion of stock is expended as revenue, when there is a demand for those results of labour which minister to enjoyment only, then labour performs two functions; it re-produces capital, or that which may be again used for production; and it also produces results for mere enjoyment or unproductive results. All labour is productive of some beneficial result; but while some of the results of labour are productive, others are unproductive. It is to the results of labour, and not to the labour, that we must look, in following out the distinction between revenue and capital,-be

tween the productive and unproductive consumption of stock.

Allowing that the expenditure of stock as revenue, gives occasion to labour of which the results are unproductive, it by no means follows that such expenditure is injurious. On the contrary, since it is the unproductive results of labour which alone are enjoyed, the greater the quantity of those results, the better the more stock we expend as revenue, the better-provided we do not trench upon that capital from which our whole stock is derived. As with individuals, so with nations. A man is the richer and happier, not for what he can keep, but for what he can spend; though if he would continue to spend, he must take care to maintain the source of his revenue. Adam Smith arrives at a different conclusion. He would give us to understand, that the greatest miser is the best, and ought therefore to be the happiest individual; and that the grand object of political economy, is to increase the productive, by diminishing the unproductive consumption of nations. Dr. Chalmers suggests that he was misled, as he has certainly misled others, by the misapplication of an epithet. Had he seen that all labour is productive of some benefit, and that the unproductive results of labour are exactly those which we enjoy-exactly those which it is the end of all labour to produce,— he would not have painted parsimony in such glowing colours, nor have represented expenditure in so ugly a form.

CHAPTER IV.

Of Stock lent at Interest.

THE stock which is lent at interest is always considered as a capital by the lender.

He expects that

in due time it is to be restored to him, and that in the mean time the borrower is to pay him a certain annual rent for the use of it. The borrower may use it either as a capital, or as a stock reserved for immediate consumption. If he uses it as a capital, he employs it in the maintenance of productive labourers, who re-produce the value with a profit. He can, in this case, both restore the capital and pay the interest without alienating or encroaching upon any other source of revenue. If he uses it as a stock reserved for immediate consumption, he acts the part of a prodigal, and dissipates in the maintenance of the idle, what was destined for the support of the industrious. He can, in this case, neither restore the capital nor pay the interest, without either alienating or encroaching upon some other source of revenue, such as the property or the rent of land.

The stock which is lent at interest is, no doubt, occasionally employed in both these ways, but in the former much more frequently than in the latter. 2 M

VOL. II.