第7章
Intheessayonmoneyherefutesthemercantilisterror，whichtendedtoconfounditwithwealth。"Menandcommodities，"
hesays，"aretherealstrengthofanycommunity。""Inthenationalstockoflabourconsistsallrealpowerandriches。"Money
isonlytheoilwhichmakesthemovementsofthemechanismofcommercemoresmoothandeasy。Heshowsthat，fromthe
domesticasdistinguishedfromtheinternationalpointofview，theabsolutequantityofmoney，supposedasoffixedamount，
inacountryisofnoconsequence，whilstanexcessivequantity，larger，thatis，thanisrequiredfortheinterchangeof
commodities，maybeinjuriousasraisingpricesanddrivingforeignersfromthehomemarkets。Hegoessofar，inoneortwo
places，astoassertthatthevalueofmoneyischieflyfictitiousorconventional，apositionwhichcannotbedefended;butit
mustnotbepressedagainsthim，ashebuildsnothingonit。Hehassomeveryingeniousobservations（since，however，
questionedbyJ。S。Mill）ontheeffectsoftheincreaseofmoneyinacountryinstimulatingindustryduringtheintervalwhich
takesplacebeforetheadditionalamountissufficientlydiffusedtoalterthewholescaleofprices。Heshowsthatthefearof
themoneyofanindustriouscommunitybeinglosttoitbypassingintoforeigncountriesisgroundless，andthat，undera
systemoffreedom，thedistributionofthepreciousmetalswhichisadaptedtotherequirementsoftradewillspontaneously
establishitself。"Inshort，aGovernmenthasgreatreasontopreservewithcareitspeopleanditsmanufactures;itsmoneyit
maysafelytrusttothecourseofhumanaffairswithoutfearorjealousy。"
Averyimportantservicewasrenderedbyhistreatmentoftherateofinterest。Heexposestheerroneousideaoften
entertainedthatitdependsonthequantityofmoneyinacountry，andshowsthatthereductionofitmustingeneralbethe
resultof"theincreaseofindustryandfrugality，ofartsandcommerce，"sothatitmayserveasabarometer，itslownessbeing
analmostinfalliblesignoftheflourishingconditionofapeople。Itmaybeobservedinpassingthatintheessaydevotedto
thissubjecthebringsoutaprincipleofhumannaturewhicheconomiststoooftenoverlook，"theconstantandinsatiable
desireofthemindforexerciseandemployment，"andtheconsequentactionofennuiinpromptingtoexertion。
Withrespecttocommerce，hepointstoitsnaturalfoundationinwhathassincebeencalled"theterritorialdivisionof
labour，"andprovesthattheprosperityofonenation，insteadofbeingahindrance，isahelptothatofitsneighbours。"Not
onlyasaman，butasaBritishsubject，"hesays，"IprayfortheflourishingcommerceofGermany，Spain，Italy，andeven
Franceitself。"Hecondemnsthe"numberlessbars，obstructions，andimpostswhichallnationsofEurope，andnonemore
thanEngland，haveputupontrade。"Yetonthequestionofprotectiontonationalindustryheisnotquiteatthefree—trade
pointofview，forheapprovesofataxonGermanlinenasencouraginghomemanufactures，andofataxonbrandyas
increasingthesaleofrumandsupportingoursoutherncolonies。Indeedithasbeenjustlyobservedthatthereareinhim
severaltracesofarefinedmercantilism，andthatherepresentsastateofopinioninwhichthetransitioniromtheoldtothe
newviewsisnotyetcompletelyeffected。
Wecannotdomorethanrefertotheessayontaxes，inwhich，amongstotherthings，herepudiatestheimptuniqueofthe
physiocrats，andtothatonpubliccredit，inwhichhecriticisesthe"newparadoxthatpublicencumbrancesareofthemselves
advantageous，independentofthenecessityofcontractingthem，"andobjects，perhapstooabsolutely，tothemodern
expedientofraisingthemoneyrequiredfornationalenterprisesbywayofloan，andsoshiftingourburdensuponthe
shouldersofposterity。
ThecharacteristicsofHume，whicharemostimportantinthehistoryofeconomicinvestigation，are（1）hispracticeof
bringingeconomicfactsintoconnectionwithalltheweightyinterestsofsocialandpoliticallife，and（2）histendencyto
introducethehistoricalspiritintothestudyofthosefacts。Headmirablyillustratesthemutualactionoftheseveralbranches
ofindustry，andtheinfluencesofprogressintheartsofproductionandincommerceongeneralcivilisation，exhibitsthe
strikingcontrastsoftheancientandmodernsystemoflife（seeespeciallytheessayOnthePopulousnessofAncient
Nations），andconsidersalmosteveryphenomenonwhichcomesunderdiscussioninitsrelationstothecontemporarystage
ofsocialdevelopment。ItcannotbedoubtedthatHumeexercisedamostimportantinfluenceonAdamSmith，whointheWealthofNations（20）callshim"byfarthemostillustriousphilosopherandhistorianofthepresentage，"andwhoesteemed
hischaractersohighlythat，afterafriendshipofmanyyearshadbeenterminatedbyHume’sdecease，hedeclaredhimto
have"approachedasnearlytotheidealofaperfectlywiseandvirtuousmanasperhapsthenatureofhumanfrailtywill
permit。"
JosiahTucker，deanofGloucester（d。1799），holdsadistinguishedplaceamongtheimmediatepredecessorsofSmith。Most
ofhisnumerousproductionshaddirectreferencetocontemporaryquestions，and，thoughmarkedbymuchsagacityand
penetration，aredeficientinpermanentinterest。InsomeoftheseheurgedtheimpolicyofrestrictionsonthetradeofIreland，
advocatedaunionofthatcountrywithEngland，andrecommendedtherecognitionoftheindependenceoftheUnitedStates
ofAmerica。Themostimportantofhisgeneraleconomicviewsarethoserelatingtointernationalcommerce。Heisanardent
supporteroffree—tradedoctrines，whichhebasesontheprinciplesthatthereisbetweennationsnonecessaryantagonism，
butratheraharmony，ofinterests，andthattheirseverallocaladvantagesanddifferentaptitudesnaturallypromptthemto
exchange。Hehadnot，however，gotquiteclearofmercantilism，andfavouredbountiesonexportedmanufacturesandthe
encouragementofpopulationbyataxoncelibacy。Dupont，andafterhimBlanqui，representTuckerasafollowerofthe
physiocrats，butthereseemstobenogroundforthisopinionexcepthisagreementwiththemonthesubjectofthefreedom
oftrade。TurgottranslatedintoFrench（1755），underthetitleofQuestionsImportantessurleCommerce，atractbyTucker
onTheExpediencyofaLawfortheNaturalisationofForeignProtestants。
In1767waspublishedSirJamesSteuart’sInquiryintothePrincipalsofPoliticalEconomy。Thiswasoneofthemost
unfortunateofbooks。Itwasthemostcompleteandsystematicsurveyofthescienceiromthepointofviewofmoderate
mercantilismwhichhadappearedinEngland。Steuartwasamanofnoordinaryabilities，andhadpreparedhimselfforhis
taskbylongandseriousstudy。Butthetimeforthemercantiledoctrineswaspast，andthesystemofnaturallibertywasin
possessionofanintellectualascendencywhichforeshadoweditspoliticaltriumph。NineyearslatertheWealthofNationswasgiventotheworld，aworkassuperiortoSteuart’sinattractivenessofstyleasinscientificsoundness。Thusthelatter
waspredestinedtofail，andinfactneverexercisedanyconsiderabletheoreticorpracticalinfluence。Smithneverquotesor
mentionsit;beingacquaintedwithSteuart，whoseconversationhesaidwasbetterthanhisbook，heprobablywishedtokeep
clearofcontroversywithhim。（21）TheGermaneconomistshaveexaminedSteuart’streatisemorecarefullythanEnglish
writershavecommonlydone;andtheyrecogniseitshighmerits，especiallyinrelationtothetheoryofvalueandthesubject
ofpopulation。Theyhavealsopointedoutthat，inthespiritofthebestrecentresearch，hehasdweltonthespecialcharacters
whichdistinguishtheeconomiespropertodifferentnationsanddifferentgradesinsocialprogress。
ComingnowtothegreatnameofAdamSmith（1723—1790），itisofthehighestimportancethatweshouldrightly
understandhispositionandjustlyestimatehisclaims。Itisplainlycontrarytofacttorepresenthim，assomehavedone，as
thecreatorofpoliticaleconomy。Thesubjectofsocialwealthhadalwaysinsomedegree，andincreasinglyinrecenttimes，
engagedtheattentionofphilosophicminds。Thestudyhadevenindisputablyassumedasystematiccharacter，and，from
beinganassemblageoffragmentarydisquisitionsonparticularquestionsofnationalinterest，hadtakentheform，notablyin
Turgot’sRéflexions，ofanorganisedbodyofdoctrine。Thetruthis，thatSmithtookupthesciencewhenitwasalready
considerablyadvanced;anditwasthisverycircumstancewhichenabledhim，bytheproductionofaclassicaltreatise，to
rendermostofhispredecessorsobsolete。But，whilstalltheeconomiclaboursoftheprecedingcenturiespreparedtheway
forhim，theydidnotanticipatehiswork。Hisappearanceatanearlierstage，orwithoutthosepreviouslabours，wouldbe
inconceivable;buthebuilt，onthefoundationwhichhadbeenlaidbyothers，muchofhisownthatwaspreciousand
enduring。
EventhosewhodonotfallintotheerrorofmakingSmiththecreatorofthescience，oftenseparatehimtoobroadlyfrom
Quesnayandhisfollowers，andrepresentthehistoryofmodernEconomicsasconsistingofthesuccessiveriseandreignof
threedoctrines——themercantile，thephysiocratic，andtheSmithian。Thelasttwoare，itistrue，atvarianceinsomeeven
importantrespects。Butitisevident，andSmithhimselffelt，thattheiragreementsweremuchmorefundamentalthantheir
differences;and，ifweregardthemashistoricalforces，theymustbeconsideredasworkingtowardsidenticalends。They
bothurgedsocietytowardstheabolitionofthepreviouslyprevailingindustrialpolicyofEuropeanGovernments;andtheir
argumentsagainstthatpolicyrestedessentiallyonthesamegrounds。WhilstSmith’scriticismwasmoresearchingand
complete，healsoanalysedmorecorrectlythanthephysiocratssomeclassesofeconomicphenomena——inparticular
dispellingtheillusionsintowhichtheyhadfallenwithrespecttotheunproductivenatureofmanufacturesandcommerce。
Theirschooldisappearedfromthescientificfield，notmerelybecauseitmetwithapoliticalcheckinthepersonofTurgot，
butbecause，aswehavealreadysaid，theWealthofNationsabsorbedintoitselfallthatwasvaluableintheirteaching，whilst
itcontinuedmoreeffectuallytheimpulsetheyhadgiventothenecessaryworkofdemolition。
Thehistoryofeconomicopinioninmoderntimes，downtothethirddecadeofthenineteenthcentury，is，infact，strictly
bipartite。Thefirststageisfilledwiththemercantilesystemwhich，aswehaveshown，wasratherapracticalpolicythana
speculativedoctrine，andwhichcameintoexistenceasthespontaneousgrowthofsocialconditionsactingonmindsnot
trainedtoscientifichabits。Thesecondstageisoccupiedwiththegradualriseandultimateascendencyofanothersystem
foundedontheideaoftherightoftheindividualtoanunimpededspherefortheexerciseofhiseconomicactivity。Withthe
latter，whichisbestdesignatedasthe"systemofnaturalliberty，"weoughttoassociatethememoryofthephysiocratsas
wellasthatofSmith，without，however，maintainingtheirservicestohavebeenequaltohis。
TheteachingofpoliticaleconomywasintheScottishuniversitiesassociatedwiththatofmoralphilosophy。Smith，asweare
told，conceivedtheentiresubjecthehadtotreatinhispubliclecturesasdivisibleintofourheads，thefirstofwhichwas
naturaltheology，thesecondethics，thethirdjurisprudence;whilstinthefourth"heexaminedthosepoliticalregulations
whicharefoundeduponexpediency，andwhicharecalculatedtoincreasetheriches，thepower，andtheprosperityofa
state。"Thelasttwobranchesofinquiryareregardedasformingbutasinglebodyofdoctrineinthewell—knownpassageof
theTheoryofMoralSentiments（1759）inwhichtheauthorpromisestogiveinanotherdiscourse"anaccountofthegeneral
principlesoflawandgovernment，andofthedifferentrevolutionstheyhaveundergoneinthedifferentagesandperiodsof
society，notonlyinwhatconcernsjustice，butinwhatconcertspolice，revenue，andarms，andwhateverelseisthesubjectof
law。"ThisshowshowlittleitwasSmith’shabittoseparate（exceptprovisionally），inhisconceptionsorhisresearches，the
economicphenomenaofsocietyfromalltherest。Thewordsabovequotedhave，indeed，beennotunjustlydescribedas
containing"ananticipation，wonderfulforhisperiod，ofgeneralSociology，bothstaticalanddynamical，ananticipation
whichbecomesstillmoreremarkablewhenwelearnfromhisliteraryexecutorsthathehadformedtheplanofaconnected
historyoftheliberalsciencesandelegantarts，whichmusthaveaddedtothebranchesofsocialstudyalreadyenumerateda
viewoftheintellectualprogressofsociety。"Thoughtheselargedesignswerenevercarriedoutintheirintegrity，asindeed
atthatperiodtheycouldnothavebeenadequatelyrealised，ithasresultedfromthemthat，thougheconomicphenomena
formthespecialsubjectoftheWealthofNations，Smithyetincorporatedintothatworkmuchthatrelatestotheothersocial
aspects，incurringtherebythecensureofsomeofhisfollowers，whoinsistwithpedanticnarrownessonthestrictisolationof
theeconomicdomain。
Therehasbeenmuchdiscussiononthequestion——WhatisthescientificmethodfollowedbySmithinhisgreatwork？By
someitisconsideredtohavebeenpurelydeductive，aviewwhichBucklehasperhapscarriedtothegreatestextreme。He
assertsthatinScotlandtheinductivemethodwasunknown，thattheinductivephilosophyexercisednoinfluenceonScottish
thinkers;and，thoughSmithspentsomeofthemostimportantyearsofhisyouthinEngland，wheretheinductivemethod
wassupreme，andthoughhewaswidelyreadingeneralphilosophicalliterature，heyetthinksheadoptedthedeductive
methodbecauseitwehabituallyfollowedinScotland，——andthisthoughBucklemaintainsthatitistheonlyappropriate，or
evenpossible，methodinpoliticaleconomy，whichsurelywouldhavebeenasufficientreasonforchoosingit。Thatthe
inductivespiritexercisednoinfluenceonScottishphilosophersiscertainlynottrue;aswillbepresentlyshown，
Montesquieu，whosemethodisessentiallyinductive，wasinSmith’stimestudiedwithquitepeculiarcareandregardedwith
specialvenerationbySmith’sfellow—countrymen。AstoSmithhimself，whatmayjustlybesaidofhimisthatthedeductive
bentwascertainlynotthepredominantcharacterofhismind，nordidhisgreatexcellencelieinthe"dialecticskill"which
Buckleascribestohim。Whatstrikesusmostinhisbookishiswideandkeenobservationofsocialfacts，andhisperpetual
tendencytodwellontheseandelicittheirsignificance，insteadofdrawingconclusionsfromabstractprinciplesbyelaborate
chainsofreasoning。Itisthishabitofhismindwhichgivesus，inreadinghim，sostrongandabidingasenseofbeingin
contactwiththerealitiesoflife。
ThatSmithdoes，however，largelyemploythedeductivemethodiscertain;andthatmethodisquitelegitimatewhenthe
premisesfromwhichthedeductionsetsoutareknownuniversalfactsofhumannatureandpropertiesofexternalobjects。
Whetherthismodeofproceedingwillcarryusfarmayindeedwellbedoubted;butitssoundnesscannotbedisputed。But
thereisanotherviciousspeciesofdeductionwhich，asCliffeLesliehasshown，seriouslytaintedthephilosophyofSmith——
inwhichthepremisesarenotfactsascertainedbyobservation，butthesameaprioriassumptions，halftheologicalhalf
metaphysical，respectingasupposedharmoniousandbeneficentnaturalorderofthingswhichwefoundinthephysiocrats，
andwhich，aswesaw，wereembodiedinthenameofthatsect。Inhisview，Naturehasmadeprovisionforsocialwell—being
bytheprincipleofthehumanconstitutionwhichpromptseverymantobetterhiscondition:theindividualaimsonlyathis
privategain，butindoingsois"ledbyaninvisiblehand"topromotethepublicgood，whichwasnopartofhisintention;
humaninstitutions，byinterferingwiththeactionofthisprincipleinthenameofthepublicinterest，defeattheirownend;
but，whenallsystemsofpreferenceorrestraintaretakenaway，"theobviousandsimplesystemofnaturallibertyestablishes
itselfofitsownaccord。"Thistheoryis，ofcourse，notexplicitlypresentedbySmithasafoundationofhiseconomic
doctrines，butitisreallythesecretsubstratumonwhichtheyrest。Yet，whilstsuchlatentpostulateswarpedhisviewof
things，theydidnotentirelydeterminehismethod。Hisnativebenttowardsthestudyofthingsastheyarepreservedhim
fromextravagancesintowhichmanyofhisfollowershavefallen。Butbesidesthis，asLesliehaspointedout，theinfluenceof
Montesquieutendedtocounterbalancethetheoreticprepossessionsproducedbythedoctrineofthejusnaturae。Thatgreat
thinker，thoughhecouldnot，athisperiod，understandthehistoricalmethodwhichistrulyappropriatetosociological
inquiry，yetfoundedhisconclusionsoninduction。Itistrue，asComtehasremarked，thathisaccumulationoffacts，
borrowedfromthemostdifferentstatesofcivilisation，andnotsubjectedtophilosophiccriticism，necessarilyremainedon
thewholesterile，oratleastcouldnotessentiallyadvancethestudyofsocietymuchbeyondthepointatwhichhefoundit。
Hismerit，aswehavebeforementioned，layintherecognitionofthesubjectionofallsocialphenomenatonaturallaws，not
inthediscoveryofthoselaws。ButthislimitationwasoverlookedbythephilosophersofthetimeofSmith，whoweremuch
attractedbythesystemhefollowedoftracingsocialfactstothespecialcircumstances，physicalormoral，ofthe
communitiesinwhichtheywereobserved。LesliehasshownthatLordKaimes，Dalrymple，andMillar——contemporariesof
Smith，andthelasthispupil——wereinfluencedbyMontesquieu;andhemighthaveaddedthemoreeminentnameof
Ferguson，whoserespectandadmirationforthegreatFrenchmanareexpressedinstrikingtermsinhisHistoryofCivil
Society。（22）WeareeveninformedthatSmithhimselfinhislateryearswasoccupiedinpreparingacommentaryontheEspiritdesLois。（23）hewasthusaffectedbytwodifferentandincongruoussystemsofthought——onesettingoutfroman
imaginarycodeofnatureintendedforthebenefitofman，andleadingtoanoptimisticviewoftheeconomicconstitution
foundedonenlightenedself—interest;theotherfollowinginductiveprocesses，andseekingtoexplaintheseveralstatesin
whichhumansocietiesarefoundexisting，asresultsofcircumstancesorinstitutionswhichhavebeeninactualoperation。
Andwefindaccordinglyinhisgreatworkacombinationofthesetwomethods——inductiveinquiryontheonehand，and，on
theotherapriorispeculationfoundedonthe"Nature"hypothesis。Thelatterviciousproceedinghasinsomeofhisfollowers
beengreatlyaggravated，whilethecountervailingspiritofinductiveinvestigationhasfallenintothebackground，andindeed
thenecessityorutilityofanysuchinvestigationintheeconomicfieldhasbeensometimesaltogetherdenied。
SomehaverepresentedSmith’sworkasofsolooseatextureandsodefectiveanarrangementthatitmaybejustlydescribed
asconsistingofaseriesofmonographs。Butthisiscertainlyanexaggeration。Thebook，itistrue，isnotframedonarigid
mould，noristhereanyparadeofsystematicdivisionsandsubdivisions;andthisdoubtlessrecommendedittomenofthe
worldandofbusiness，forwhoseinstructionitwas，atleastprimarilyintended。Butithastherealandpervadingunitywhich
resultsfromasetofprinciplesandamodeofthinkingidenticalthroughoutandthegeneralabsenceofsuchcontradictionsas
wouldarisefromanimperfectdigestionofthesubject。
Smithsetsoutfromthethoughtthattheannuallabourofanationisthesourcefromwhichitderivesitssupplyofthe
necessariesandconveniencesoflife。Hedoesnotofcoursecontemplatelabourastheonlyfactorinproduction;butithas
beensupposedthatbyemphasisingitattheoutsetheatoncestrikesthenoteofdifferencebetweenhimselfontheonehand
andboththemercantilistsandthephysiocratsontheother。Theimprovementintheproductivenessoflabourdepends
largelyonitsdivision;andheproceedsaccordinglytogivehisunrivalledexpositionofthatprinciple，ofthegroundson
whichitrests，andofitsgreaterapplicabilitytomanufacturesthantoagriculture，inconsequenceofwhichthelatter
relativelylagsbehindinthecourseofeconomicdevelopment。（24）Theoriginofthedivisionoflabourhefindsinthe
propensityofhumannature"totruck，barter，orexchangeonethingforanother。"Heshowsthatacertainaccumulationof
capitalisaconditionprecedentofthisdivision，andthatthedegreetowhichitcanbecarriedisdependentontheextentof
themarket。Whenthedivisionoflabourhasbeenestablished，eachmemberofthesocietymusthaverecoursetotheothers
forthesupplyofmostofhiswants;amediumofexchangeisthusfoundtobenecessary，andmoneycomesintouse。The
exchangeofgoodsagainsteachotheroragainstmoneygivesrisetothenotionofvalue。Thiswordhastwomeanings——that
ofutility，andthatofpurchasingpower;theonemaybecalledvalueinuse，theothervalueinexchange。Merelymentioning
theformer，Smithgoesontostudythelatter。What，heasks，isthemeasureofvalue？whatregulatestheamountofone
thingwhichwillbegivenforanother？"Labour，"Smithanswers，"istherealmeasureoftheexchangeablevalueofall
commodities。""Equalquantitiesoflabour，atalltimesandplaces，areofequalvaluetothelabourer。"（25）"Labouralone，
therefore，nevervaryinginitsownvalue，isalonetheultimateandrealstandardbywhichthevalueofallcommoditiescanat
alltimesandplacesbeestimatedandcompared。Itistheirrealprice;moneyistheirnominalpriceonly。"Money，however，is
inmen’sactualtransactionsthemeasureofvalue，aswellasthevehicleofexchange;andthepreciousmetalsarebestsuited
forthisfunction，asvaryinglittleintheirownvalueforperiodsofmoderatelength;fordistanttimes，cornisabetter
standardofcomparison。Inrelationtotheearliestsocialstage，weneedconsidernothingbuttheamountoflabouremployed
intheproductionofanarticleasdeterminingitsexchangevalue;butinmoreadvancedperiodspriceiscomplex，and
consistsinthemostgeneralcaseofthreeelements——wages，profit，andrent。Wagesaretherewardoflabour。Profitarisesas
soonasstock，beingaccumulatedinthehandsofoneperson，isemployedbyhiminsettingotherstowork，andsupplying
themwithmaterialsandsubsistence，inordertomakeagainbywhattheyproduce。Rentarisesassoonasthelandofa
countryhasallbecomeprivateproperty;"thelandlords，likeallothermen，lovetoreapwheretheyneversowed，and
demandarentevenforitsnaturalproduce。"Ineveryimprovedsociety，then，thesethreeelementsentermoreorlessintothe
priceofthefargreaterpartofcommodities。Thereisineverysocietyorneighbourhoodanordinaryoraveragerateof
wagesandprofitineverydifferentemploymentoflabourandstock，regulatedbyprinciplestobeexplainedhereafter，asalso
anordinaryoraveragerateofrent。Thesemaybecalledthenaturalratesatthetimewhenandtheplacewheretheyprevail;
andthenaturalpriceofacommodityiswhatissufficienttopayfortherentoftheland，（26）thewagesofthelabour，andthe
profitofthestocknecessaryforbringingthecommoditytomarket。Themarketpricemayriseaboveorfallbelowthe
amountsofixed，beingdeterminedbytheproportionbetweenthequantitybroughttomarketandthedemandofthosewho
arewillingtopaythenaturalprice。Towardsthenaturalpriceasacentrethemarketprice，regulatedbycompetition，
constantlygravitates。Somecommodities，however，aresubjecttoamonopolyofproduction，whetherfromthepeculiarities
ofalocalityorfromlegalprivilegetheirpriceisalwaysthehighestthatcanbegot;thenaturalpriceofothercommoditiesis
thelowestwhichcanbetakenforanylengthoftimetogether。Thethreecomponentpartsorfactorsofpricevarywiththe
circumstancesofthesociety。Therateofwagesisdeterminedbya"dispute"orstruggleofoppositeinterestsbetweenthe
employerandtheworkman。Aminimumrateisfixedbytheconditionthattheymustbeatleastsufficienttoenableaman
andhiswifetomaintainthemselvesand，ingeneral，bringupafamily。Theexcessabovethiswilldependonthe
circumstancesofthecountryandtheconsequentdemandforlabour——wagesbeinghighwhennationalwealthisincreasing，
lowwhenitisdeclining。Thesamecircumstancesdeterminethevariationofprofits，butinanoppositedirection;theincrease
ofstock，whichraiseswages，tendingtolowerprofitthroughthemutualcompetitionofcapitalists。"Thewholeofthe
advantagesanddisadvantagesofthedifferentemploymentsoflabourandstockmust，inthesameneighbourhood，beeither
perfectlyequalorcontinuallytendingtoequality";ifonehadgreatlytheadvantageovertheothers，peoplewouldcrowd
intoit，andthelevelwouldsoonberestored。Yetpecuniarywagesandprofitsareverydifferentindifferentemployment——
eitherfromcertaincircumstancesaffectingtheemployments，whichrecommendordisparagetheminmen’snotions，orfrom
nationalpolicy，"whichnowhereleavesthingsatperfectliberty。"HerefollowsSmith’sadmirableexpositionofthecauses
whichproducetheinequalitiesinwagesandprofitsjustreferredto，apassageaffordingampleevidenceofhishabitsofnice
observationofthelessobvioustraitsinhumannature，andalsooftheoperationbothoftheseandofsocialinstitutionson
economicfacts。Therentoflandcomesnexttobeconsidered，asthelastofthethreeelementsofprice。Rentisamonopoly
price，equal，nottowhatthelandlordcouldaffordtotake，buttowhatthefarmercanaffordtogive，"Suchpartsonlyofthe
produceoflandcancommonlybebroughttomarket，ofwhichtheordinarypriceissufficienttoreplacethestockwhich
mustbeemployedinbringingthemthither，togetherwiththeordinaryprofits。Iftheordinarypriceismorethanthis;the
surpluspartwillnaturallygototherentoftheland。Ifitisnotmore，thoughthecommoditymaybebroughttomarket，it
canaffordnorenttothelandlord，Whetherthepriceisorisnotmoredependsonthedemand。""Rent，therefore，entersinto
thepriceofcommoditiesinadifferentwayfromwagesandprofits。Highorlowwagesandprofitarethecausesofhighor
lowprice;highorlowrentistheeffectofit。"
Rent，wages，andprofits，astheyaretheelementsofprice，arealsotheconstituentsofincome;andthethreegreatordersof
everycivilisedsociety，fromwhoserevenuesthatofeveryotherorderisultimatelyderived，arethelandlords，thelabourers，
andthecapitalists。Therelationoftheinterestsofthesethreeclassestothoseofsocietyatlargeisdifferent。Theinterestof
thelandlordalwayscoincideswiththegeneralinterest:whateverpromotesorobstructstheonehasthesameeffectonthe
other。Soalsodoesthatofthelabourer:whenthewealthofthenationisprogressive，hiswagesarehigh;theyarelowwhen
itisstationaryorretrogressive。"Theinterestofthethirdorderhasnotthesameconnectionwiththegeneralinterestofthe
societyasthatoftheothertwo;……itisalwaysinsomerespectsdifferentfromandoppositetothatofthepublic。"
Thesubjectofthesecondbookis"thenature，accumulation，andimprovementofstock。"Aman’swholestockconsistsof
twoportions——thatwhichisreservedforhisimmediateconsumption，andthatwhichisemployedsoastoyieldarevenueto
itsowner。Thislatter，whichishis"capital，"isdivisibleintothetwoclassesof"fixed"and"circulating。"Thefirstissuchas
yieldsaprofitwithoutpassingintootherhands。Thesecondconsistsofsuchgoods，raised，manufactured，orpurchased，as
aresoldforaprofitandreplacedbyothergoods;