From these extracts, and definitions of the term wealth, which, as thus defined, is understood to comprise all the objects of inquiry in political economy, it appears, according to this view of the science, that it has to do with nothing but wealth ; that is, material objects, susceptible of accumulation, possessing utility or desirableness, acquired by labour, possessing value, and capable of definite valuation. The quality of possessing exchangeable value is, indeed, insisted on as essential to all the objects to which its inquiries relate. This quality is employed as that by which the estimate of the magnitude of the products of industry is formed; and hence it is affirmed that political economy is nothing but "the science of values."

In presenting a concise view of the nature and character of the discussions of political economy, it appears to me that two things should be comprised in the expression; the one of which is, the subject of discussion; and the other, the object of the discussion. The first consists of the industrious faculties, the land, and stock, which are possessed by the individual members of a social community. These form the tools, if one may so speak, which are to be employed for the attainment of the end in view. The second thing to be expressed is this contemplated end or object.

Here one may pause and ask, if wealth can really be the subject, and the amassing of wealth the proper object, of economical science? Such is the nature of this question, that, whether it be replied to in the affirmative or negative, the answer cannot but extend its influence through every branch of the inquiry, and pervade the whole train of reasoning from its first premises to its last conclusion. It is intended in this place to show, that, notwithstanding universally received opinions, and the deference which ought to be paid to authorities of acknowledged merit, the question can only be answered in the negative; and that we must deny that wealth forms either the proper subject of discussion, or the whole object of this science. There is the less reason to allow our judgment on this point to be biassed by authority when we reflect, that the science is as yet but in its infancy, and its most able advocates but as students of a longer standing or maturer years.

We shall first observe on the end or object of political economy. If it were allowed that wealth is the proper and only object of this science, and that its inquiries must be limited to the production and amassing of material articles of wealth, it would follow that the problem would be to raise and save the greatest quantity of material produce, without regard to the happiness or misery, the vicious or virtuous conduct, of the sentient beings. by whom it is raised. By what means, or by whom, this produce should be raised would be immaterial. Whether by hard labour or easy labour; by labour of the nature of healthful exercise, or of toilsome and life-consuming efforts; by cattle, machinery, or men; slaves or freemen; would signify nothing, except as far as the wear and tear of the dead or living machinery might affect the future production. Man might be regarded altogether as a mechanical agent, like the plough, the loom, or the horses with which he works, and might be urged to labour by similar means. The object would be, so to arrange the machines, whether living, as cattle or men, and sustained by food and air, or inanimate, and propelled by wind, by water, or steam, as to cause them to produce in the greatest abundance all tangible objects of necessity, convenience, and luxury.* Such are the legitimate inferences which follow from inquiries of the nature now spoken of.

The objects to be attained by social industry, or the aggregate of the separate labours and studies of individuals, must be some one or more of those which are the objects of personal industry; and the investigations by which we seek to find how most advantageously to arrange and direct the whole industry of a nation, can only be for the purpose of acquiring the objects of personal industry.

What then are these objects which individuals seek by the exertion of their industry to acquire for themselves?

Every object for the attainment of which individual industry is called forth, or human exertion is made, is desired for the sake, either of the enjoyment it is expected to afford, or of the evil it is hoped to be able to avert. The supply of wants, and the gratification of wishes, are the objects of all individual * Thompson on the Distribution of Wealth.

labour; and the objects of all study or contrivance are the same: these are either to procure good or to avoid evil, present or future, real or imaginary. Individual labours and studies are not directed solely to the acquisition of riches, or material articles of wealth, possessing the qualities which have been described. Useful and necessary as they are, they form but a part of the objects of our exertions. Riches, even in their most extensive sense, hold but a place amongst our other objects of pursuit. There are other and nobler motives than that of gain which excite the ambition, and spur on the industry of intelligent beings to the greatest exertions. Our wants and wishes. are immeasurably various and extensive; they may be classed as corporeal and intellectual, as they are directed towards objects material and immaterial; or as individual and social: our desires extend through time and to eternity. Our pleasures are derived from the exercise of the animal powers, the indulgence of the animal senses, and the exercise of the mental faculties. In these are comprised the pleasures arising from the acquisition and possession of wealth, of knowledge, and of skill, from health, from the possession of friends, from power, from reputation, from piety and benevolence, from the gratification of hatred and revenge, from memory, contemplation, imagination, and expectation. In this enumeration of wants and pleasures, a wide field is presented. But our subject does not embrace all the circumstances or considerations attendant on the supply of our wants and wishes. There are objects of personal exertion with which it has nothing to do it takes only a particular part of them. The question is, What is this part. To this we answer, It is not every kind of pleasure that is procurable by industry; and with such as are not so procurable, our subject is not concerned. We have nothing to do with the labours of recreation, the pursuits of ambition, the exertions of piety and benevolence, or social gratifications abstractedly considered. But though not concerned with these directly, we are so in an indirect manner; that is, as far as industry is exerted to acquire the pecuniary means to procure, and the leisure to enjoy, the pleasures, or the opportunity to avoid the opposite pains, arising from these several sources; and as far as the industry of

the whole community is susceptible of arrangement and direction, with a prospect of more or less success as regards the general happiness on the attainment or avoidance of the plea sures and pains accruing from these sources, they cannot but come within our province. How is it possible to regard only the pleasures arising from wealth, and exclude entirely the pleasures arising from all the rest? In considering the means of improving the outward circumstances of mankind, of affording greater pleasure with less exertion, whatever can afford enjoyment, "every human exertion to avoid pain and obtain pleasure," whether it add to our accumulative wealth or not, is, when successful, equally beneficial with wealth itself. To limit our inquiries to wealth, would be to take but half our subject into consideration, and to give riches a higher place in the scale of estimation than they deserve. Even riches are not desired for their own sake, and they may be purchased at too dear a price; they are only really valuable as far as they contribute to enjoyment, and as the pleasure they afford outweighs the pain of their acquisition. They would lose their character and value should they cease to afford enjoyment; for men would then no longer be willing to use any exertion, or make any sacrifice of labour, to obtain them; and it were absurd to confine our attention solely to amass riches, while overlooking those essential conditions under which alone their possession conduces to human happiness. Individual industry is exerted to acquire knowledge and skill, and the industry of a nation may be so directed as either to promote or to retard their acquisition; and, consequently, to increase or diminish the pleasures which such acquisition, and the advantage or profit which their possession, affords. We cannot, then, in a comprehensive view of national industry, omit the consideration of the means by which this pleasure and advantage may be augmented. The same may be said, in a degree, of the pleasures which industry does not directly procure, but which leisure alone can afford the opportunity of enjoying. Such are the pleasures arising from society and friends, from the pursuits of recreation and ambition, from imagination, and some other sources. Men labour hard, and study the way to get quickly over their work, in order

to enjoy these pleasures, or to occupy themselves in works of friendship, piety, and benevolence. As it is through leisure alone that these pleasures can be procured, they ought to come within the scope of political economy: not that their acquisition itself should form one of the objects of its consideration, but the acquisition of that leisure through which alone the opportunity of enjoying them is afforded. The object then, is not, "all that man desires as useful and delightful to him; again, all "the purchaseable means of human enjoyment;" + but all that is procurable by industry.

nor

It is commonly thought that it is a point of the first importance to promote national industry. But, unless in a qualified measure, such cannot be the proper object of political economy far from it, and for this reason, that labour is not the aim of individuals, and, consequently, ought not to be the object of the direction and regulation of social industry. Labour in itself is not to be accounted a good, but an evil: it is good only so far as the rewards it procures are desirable in a greater degree than the effort to obtain them is painful. Our object then is, not simply to increase the quantity and improve the quality of the marketable products of industry, or successfully to direct labour and heighten its efficacy; but we have another, and a scarcely less important, end in view,-to abridge the sacrifice of pain or toil which must be made for these purposes. We desire to promote, not national industry, but, in a measure, even national idleness; not to increase the burthen of the curse of perpetual labour on our race, but to lighten its pressure. While we wish to augment the material objects which afford us pleasure, and so to distribute them amongst the members of the society, as to afford the highest gratification they are capable of yielding, we wish likewise to increase the leisure we can devote to their enjoyment, and to promote, not only affluence, but ease. From this statement of the proper objects of political economy, we proceed to observe on the subject of its investigations; through the suitable application of which, the objects, whatever they be, may be attained.

* Lord Lauderdale, p. 57, 2nd edit.

+ Principles of Polit. Econ. by P. Scrope, Esq. p. 43.