<h2> Conclusion of the Digression concerning the Variations in the Value of Silver. </h2>
<p>The greater part of the writers who have collected the money price of
things in ancient times, seem to have considered the low money price of
corn, and of goods in general, or, in other words, the high value of gold
and silver, as a proof, not only of the scarcity of those metals, but of
the poverty and barbarism of the country at the time when it took place.
This notion is connected with the system of political economy, which
represents national wealth as consisting in the abundance and national
poverty in the scarcity, of gold and silver; a system which I shall
endeavour to explain and examine at great length in the fourth book of
this Inquiry. I shall only observe at present, that the high value of the
precious metals can be no proof of the poverty or barbarism of any
particular country at the time when it took place. It is a proof only of
the barrenness of the mines which happened at that time to supply the
commercial world. A poor country, as it cannot afford to buy more, so it
can as little afford to pay dearer for gold and silver than a rich one;
and the value of those metals, therefore, is not likely to be higher in
the former than in the latter. In China, a country much richer than any
part of Europe, the value of the precious metals is much higher than in
any part of Europe. As the wealth of Europe, indeed, has increased greatly
since the discovery of the mines of America, so the value of gold and
silver has gradually diminished. This diminution of their value, however,
has not been owing to the increase of the real wealth of Europe, of the
annual produce of its land and labour, but to the accidental discovery of
more abundant mines than any that were known before. The increase of the
quantity of gold and silver in Europe, and the increase of its
manufactures and agriculture, are two events which, though they have
happened nearly about the same time, yet have arisen from very different
causes, and have scarce any natural connection with one another. The one
has arisen from a mere accident, in which neither prudence nor policy
either had or could have any share; the other, from the fall of the feudal
system, and from the establishment of a government which afforded to
industry the only encouragement which it requires, some tolerable security
that it shall enjoy the fruits of its own labour. Poland, where the feudal
system still continues to take place, is at this day as beggarly a country
as it was before the discovery of America. The money price of corn,
however, has risen; the real value of the precious metals has fallen in
Poland, in the same manner as in other parts of Europe. Their quantity,
therefore, must have increased there as in other places, and nearly in the
same proportion to the annual produce of its land and labour. This
increase of the quantity of those metals, however, has not, it seems,
increased that annual produce, has neither improved the manufactures and
agriculture of the country, nor mended the circumstances of its
inhabitants. Spain and Portugal, the countries which possess the mines,
are, after Poland, perhaps the two most beggarly countries in Europe. The
value of the precious metals, however, must be lower in Spain and Portugal
than in any other part of Europe, as they come from those countries to all
other parts of Europe, loaded, not only with a freight and an insurance,
but with the expense of smuggling, their exportation being either
prohibited or subjected to a duty. In proportion to the annual produce of
the land and labour, therefore, their quantity must be greater in those
countries than in any other part of Europe; those countries, however, are
poorer than the greater part of Europe. Though the feudal system has been
abolished in Spain and Portugal, it has not been succeeded by a much
better.</p>
<p>As the low value of gold and silver, therefore, is no proof of the wealth
and flourishing state of the country where it takes place; so neither is
their high value, or the low money price either of goods in general, or of
corn in particular, any proof of its poverty and barbarism.</p>
<p>But though the low money price, either of goods in general, or of corn in
particular, be no proof of the poverty or barbarism of the times, the low
money price of some particular sorts of goods, such as cattle, poultry,
game of all kinds, etc. in proportion to that of corn, is a most decisive
one. It clearly demonstrates, first, their great abundance in proportion
to that of corn, and, consequently, the great extent of the land which
they occupied in proportion to what was occupied by corn; and, secondly,
the low value of this land in proportion to that of corn land, and,
consequently, the uncultivated and unimproved state of the far greater
part of the lands of the country. It clearly demonstrates, that the stock
and population of the country did not bear the same proportion to the
extent of its territory, which they commonly do in civilized countries;
and that society was at that time, and in that country, but in its
infancy. From the high or low money price, either of goods in general, or
of corn in particular, we can infer only, that the mines, which at that
time happened to supply the commercial world with gold and silver, were
fertile or barren, not that the country was rich or poor. But from the
high or low money price of some sorts of goods in proportion to that of
others, we can infer, with a degree of probability that approaches almost
to certainty, that it was rich or poor, that the greater part of its lands
were improved or unimproved, and that it was either in a more or less
barbarous state, or in a more or less civilized one.</p>
<p>Any rise in the money price of goods which proceeded altogether from the
degradation of the value of silver, would affect all sorts of goods
equally, and raise their price universally, a third, or a fourth, or a
fifth part higher, according as silver happened to lose a third, or a
fourth, or a fifth part of its former value. But the rise in the price of
provisions, which has been the subject of so much reasoning and
conversation, does not affect all sorts of provisions equally. Taking the
course of the present century at an average, the price of corn, it is
acknowledged, even by those who account for this rise by the degradation
of the value of silver, has risen much less than that of some other sorts
of provisions. The rise in the price of those other sorts of provisions,
therefore, cannot be owing altogether to the degradation of the value of
silver. Some other causes must be taken into the account; and those which
have been above assigned, will, perhaps, without having recourse to the
supposed degradation of the value of silver, sufficiently explain this
rise in those particular sorts of provisions, of which the price has
actually risen in proportion to that of corn.</p>
<p>As to the price of corn itself, it has, during the sixty-four first years
of the present century, and before the late extraordinary course of bad
seasons, been somewhat lower than it was during the sixty-four last years
of the preceding century. This fact is attested, not only by the accounts
of Windsor market, but by the public fiars of all the different counties
of Scotland, and by the accounts of several different markets in France,
which have been collected with great diligence and fidelity by Mr
Messance, and by Mr Dupr� de St Maur. The evidence is more complete than
could well have been expected in a matter which is naturally so very
difficult to be ascertained.</p>
<p>As to the high price of corn during these last ten or twelve years, it can
be sufficiently accounted for from the badness of the seasons, without
supposing any degradation in the value of silver.</p>
<p>The opinion, therefore, that silver is continually sinking in its value,
seems not to be founded upon any good observations, either upon the prices
of corn, or upon those of other provisions.</p>
<p>The same quantity of silver, it may perhaps be said, will, in the present
times, even according to the account which has been here given, purchase a
much smaller quantity of several sorts of provisions than it would have
done during some part of the last century; and to ascertain whether this
change be owing to a rise in the value of those goods, or to a fall in the
value of silver, is only to establish a vain and useless distinction,
which can be of no sort of service to the man who has only a certain
quantity of silver to go to market with, or a certain fixed revenue in
money. I certainly do not pretend that the knowledge of this distinction
will enable him to buy cheaper. It may not, however, upon that account be
altogether useless.</p>
<p>It may be of some use to the public, by affording an easy proof of the
prosperous condition of the country. If the rise in the price of some
sorts of provisions be owing altogether to a fall in the value of silver,
it is owing to a circumstance, from which nothing can be inferred but the
fertility of the American mines. The real wealth of the country, the
annual produce of its land and labour, may, notwithstanding this
circumstance, be either gradually declining, as in Portugal and Poland; or
gradually advancing, as in most other parts of Europe. But if this rise in
the price of some sorts of provisions be owing to a rise in the real value
of the land which produces them, to its increased fertility, or, in
consequence of more extended improvement and good cultivation, to its
having been rendered fit for producing corn; it is owing to a circumstance
which indicates, in the clearest manner, the prosperous and advancing
state of the country. The land constitutes by far the greatest, the most
important, and the most durable part of the wealth of every extensive
country. It may surely be of some use, or, at least, it may give some
satisfaction to the public, to have so decisive a proof of the increasing
value of by far the greatest, the most important, and the most durable
part of its wealth.</p>
<p>It may, too, be of some use to the public, in regulating the pecuniary
reward of some of its inferior servants. If this rise in the price of some
sorts of provisions be owing to a fall in the value of silver, their
pecuniary reward, provided it was not too large before, ought certainly to
be augmented in proportion to the extent of this fall. If it is not
augmented, their real recompence will evidently be so much diminished. But
if this rise of price is owing to the increased value, in consequence of
the improved fertility of the land which produces such provisions, it
becomes a much nicer matter to judge, either in what proportion any
pecuniary reward ought to be augmented, or whether it ought to be
augmented at all. The extension of improvement and cultivation, as it
necessarily raises more or less, in proportion to the price of corn, that
of every sort of animal food, so it as necessarily lowers that of, I
believe, every sort of vegetable food. It raises the price of animal food;
because a great part of the land which produces it, being rendered fit for
producing corn, must afford to the landlord anti farmer the rent and
profit of corn land. It lowers the price of vegetable food; because, by
increasing the fertility of the land, it increases its abundance. The
improvements of agriculture, too, introduce many sorts of vegetable food,
which requiring less land, and not more labour than corn, come much
cheaper to market. Such are potatoes and maize, or what is called Indian
corn, the two most important improvements which the agriculture of Europe,
perhaps, which Europe itself, has received from the great extension of its
commerce and navigation. Many sorts of vegetable food, besides, which in
the rude state of agriculture are confined to the kitchen-garden, and
raised only by the spade, come, in its improved state, to be introduced
into common fields, and to be raised by the plough; such as turnips,
carrots, cabbages, etc. If, in the progress of improvement, therefore, the
real price of one species of food necessarily rises, that of another as
necessarily falls; and it becomes a matter of more nicety to judge how far
the rise in the one may be compensated by the fall in the other. When the
real price of butcher's meat has once got to its height (which, with
regard to every sort, except perhaps that of hogs flesh, it seems to have
done through a great part of England more than a century ago), any rise
which can afterwards happen in that of any other sort of animal food,
cannot much affect the circumstances of the inferior ranks of people. The
circumstances of the poor, through a great part of England, cannot surely
be so much distressed by any rise in the price of poultry, fish,
wild-fowl, or venison, as they must be relieved by the fall in that of
potatoes.</p>
<p>In the present season of scarcity, the high price of corn no doubt
distresses the poor. But in times of moderate plenty, when corn is at its
ordinary or average price, the natural rise in the price of any other sort
of rude produce cannot much affect them. They suffer more, perhaps, by the
artificial rise which has been occasioned by taxes in the price of some
manufactured commodities, as of salt, soap, leather, candles, malt, beer,
ale, etc.</p>
<p>Effects of the Progress of Improvement upon the real Price of
Manufactures.</p>
<p>It is the natural effect of improvement, however, to diminish gradually
the real price of almost all manufactures. That of the manufacturing
workmanship diminishes, perhaps, in all of them without exception. In
consequence of better machinery, of greater dexterity, and of a more
proper division and distribution of work, all of which are the natural
effects of improvement, a much smaller quantity of labour becomes
requisite for executing any particular piece of work; and though, in
consequence of the flourishing circumstances of the society, the real
price of labour should rise very considerably, yet the great diminution of
the quantity will generally much more than compensate the greatest rise
which can happen in the price.</p>
<p>There are, indeed, a few manufactures, in which the necessary rise in the
real price of the rude materials will more than compensate all the
advantages which improvement can introduce into the execution of the work
in carpenters' and joiners' work, and in the coarser sort of cabinet work,
the necessary rise in the real price of barren timber, in consequence of
the improvement of land, will more than compensate all the advantages
which can be derived from the best machinery, the greatest dexterity, and
the most proper division and distribution of work.</p>
<p>But in all cases in which the real price of the rude material either does
not rise at all, or does not rise very much, that of the manufactured
commodity sinks very considerably.</p>
<p>This diminution of price has, in the course of the present and preceding
century, been most remarkable in those manufactures of which the materials
are the coarser metals. A better movement of a watch, than about the
middle of the last century could have been bought for twenty pounds, may
now perhaps be had for twenty shillings. In the work of cutlers and
locksmiths, in all the toys which are made of the coarser metals, and in
all those goods which are commonly known by the name of Birmingham and
Sheffield ware, there has been, during the same period, a very great
reduction of price, though not altogether so great as in watch-work. It
has, however, been sufficient to astonish the workmen of every other part
of Europe, who in many cases acknowledge that they can produce no work of
equal goodness for double or even for triple the price. There are perhaps
no manufactures, in which the division of labour can be carried further,
or in which the machinery employed admits of' a greater variety of
improvements, than those of which the materials are the coarser metals.</p>
<p>In the clothing manufacture there has, during the same period, been no
such sensible reduction of price. The price of superfine cloth, I have
been assured, on the contrary, has, within these five-and-twenty or thirty
years, risen somewhat in proportion to its quality, owing, it was said, to
a considerable rise in the price of the material, which consists
altogether of Spanish wool. That of the Yorkshire cloth, which is made
altogether of English wool, is said, indeed, during the course of the
present century, to have fallen a good deal in proportion to its quality.
Quality, however, is so very disputable a matter, that I look upon all
information of this kind as somewhat uncertain. In the clothing
manufacture, the division of labour is nearly the same now as it was a
century ago, and the machinery employed is not very different. There may,
however, have been some small improvements in both, which may have
occasioned some reduction of price.</p>
<p>But the reduction will appear much more sensible and undeniable, if we
compare the price of this manufacture in the present times with what it
was in a much remoter period, towards the end of the fifteenth century,
when the labour was probably much less subdivided, and the machinery
employed much more imperfect, than it is at present.</p>
<p>In 1487, being the 4th of Henry VII., it was enacted, that "whosoever
shall sell by retail a broad yard of the finest scarlet grained, or of
other grained cloth of the finest making, above sixteen shillings, shall
forfeit forty shillings for every yard so sold." Sixteen shillings,
therefore, containing about the same quantity of silver as four-and-twenty
shillings of our present money, was, at that time, reckoned not an
unreasonable price for a yard of the finest cloth; and as this is a
sumptuary law, such cloth, it is probable, had usually been sold somewhat
dearer. A guinea may be reckoned the highest price in the present times.
Even though the quality of the cloths, therefore, should be supposed
equal, and that of the present times is most probably much superior, yet,
even upon this supposition, the money price of the finest cloth appears to
have been considerably reduced since the end of the fifteenth century. But
its real price has been much more reduced. Six shillings and eightpence
was then, and long afterwards, reckoned the average price of a quarter of
wheat. Sixteen shillings, therefore, was the price of two quarters and
more than three bushels of wheat. Valuing a quarter of wheat in the
present times at eight-and-twenty shillings, the real price of a yard of
fine cloth must, in those times, have been equal to at least three pounds
six shillings and sixpence of our present money. The man who bought it
must have parted with the command of a quantity of labour and subsistence
equal to what that sum would purchase in the present times.</p>
<p>The reduction in the real price of the coarse manufacture, though
considerable, has not been so great as in that of the fine.</p>
<p>In 1463, being the 3rd of Edward IV. it was enacted, that "no servant in
husbandry nor common labourer, nor servant to any artificer inhabiting out
of a city or burgh, shall use or wear in their clothing any cloth above
two shillings the broad yard." In the 3rd of Edward IV., two shillings
contained very nearly the same quantity of silver as four of our present
money. But the Yorkshire cloth which is now sold at four shillings the
yard, is probably much superior to any that was then made for the wearing
of the very poorest order of common servants. Even the money price of
their clothing, therefore, may, in proportion to the quality, be somewhat
cheaper in the present than it was in those ancient times. The real price
is certainly a good deal cheaper. Tenpence was then reckoned what is
called the moderate and reasonable price of a bushel of wheat. Two
shillings, therefore, was the price of two bushels and near two pecks of
wheat, which in the present times, at three shillings and sixpence the
bushel, would be worth eight shillings and ninepence. For a yard of this
cloth the poor servant must have parted with the power of purchasing a
quantity of subsistence equal to what eight shillings and ninepence would
purchase in the present times. This is a sumptuary law, too, restraining
the luxury and extravagance of the poor. Their clothing, therefore, had
commonly been much more expensive.</p>
<p>The same order of people are, by the same law, prohibited from wearing
hose, of which the price should exceed fourteen-pence the pair, equal to
about eight-and-twenty pence of our present money. But fourteen-pence was
in those times the price of a bushel and near two pecks of wheat; which in
the present times, at three and sixpence the bushel, would cost five
shillings and threepence. We should in the present times consider this as
a very high price for a pair of stockings to a servant of the poorest and
lowest order. He must however, in those times, have paid what was really
equivalent to this price for them.</p>
<p>In the time of Edward IV. the art of knitting stockings was probably not
known in any part of Europe. Their hose were made of common cloth, which
may have been one of the causes of their dearness. The first person that
wore stockings in England is said to have been Queen Elizabeth. She
received them as a present from the Spanish ambassador.</p>
<p>Both in the coarse and in the fine woollen manufacture, the machinery
employed was much more imperfect in those ancient, than it is in the
present times. It has since received three very capital improvements,
besides, probably, many smaller ones, of which it may be difficult to
ascertain either the number or the importance. The three capital
improvements are, first, the exchange of the rock and spindle for the
spinning-wheel, which, with the same quantity of labour, will perform more
than double the quantity of work. Secondly, the use of several very
ingenious machines, which facilitate and abridge, in a still greater
proportion, the winding of the worsted and woollen yarn, or the proper
arrangement of the warp and woof before they are put into the loom; an
operation which, previous to the invention of those machines, must have
been extremely tedious and troublesome. Thirdly, the employment of the
fulling-mill for thickening the cloth, instead of treading it in water.
Neither wind nor water mills of any kind were known in England so early as
the beginning of the sixteenth century, nor, so far as I know, in any
other part of Europe north of the Alps. They had been introduced into
Italy some time before.</p>
<p>The consideration of these circumstances may, perhaps, in some measure,
explain to us why the real price both of the coarse and of the fine
manufacture was so much higher in those ancient than it is in the present
times. It cost a greater quantity of labour to bring the goods to market.
When they were brought thither, therefore, they must have purchased, or
exchanged for the price of, a greater quantity.</p>
<p>The coarse manufacture probably was, in those ancient times, carried on in
England in the same manner as it always has been in countries where arts
and manufactures are in their infancy. It was probably a household
manufacture, in which every different part of the work was occasionally
performed by all the different members of almost every private family, but
so as to be their work only when they had nothing else to do, and not to
be the principal business from which any of them derived the greater part
of their subsistence. The work which is performed in this manner, it has
already been observed, comes always much cheaper to market than that which
is the principal or sole fund of the workman's subsistence. The fine
manufacture, on the other hand, was not, in those times, carried on in
England, but in the rich and commercial country of Flanders; and it was
probably conducted then, in the same manner as now, by people who derived
the whole, or the principal part of their subsistence from it. It was,
besides, a foreign manufacture, and must have paid some duty, the ancient
custom of tonnage and poundage at least, to the king. This duty, indeed,
would not probably be very great. It was not then the policy of Europe to
restrain, by high duties, the importation of foreign manufactures, but
rather to encourage it, in order that merchants might be enabled to
supply, at as easy a rate as possible, the great men with the
conveniencies and luxuries which they wanted, and which the industry of
their own country could not afford them.</p>
<p>The consideration of these circumstances may, perhaps, in some measure
explain to us why, in those ancient times, the real price of the coarse
manufacture was, in proportion to that of the fine, so much lower than in
the present times.</p>
<h2> Conclusion of the Chapter. </h2>
<p>I shall conclude this very long chapter with observing, that every
improvement in the circumstances of the society tends, either directly or
indirectly, to raise the real rent of land to increase the real wealth of
the landlord, his power of purchasing the labour, or the produce of the
labour of other people.</p>
<p>The extension of improvement and cultivation tends to raise it directly.
The landlord's share of the produce necessarily increases with the
increase of the produce.</p>
<p>That rise in the real price of those parts of the rude produce of land,
which is first the effect of the extended improvement and cultivation, and
afterwards the cause of their being still further extended, the rise in
the price of cattle, for example, tends, too, to raise the rent of land
directly, and in a still greater proportion. The real value of the
landlord's share, his real command of the labour of other people, not only
rises with the real value of the produce, but the proportion of his share
to the whole produce rises with it.</p>
<p>That produce, after the rise in its real price, requires no more labour to
collect it than before. A smaller proportion of it will, therefore, be
sufficient to replace, with the ordinary profit, the stock which employs
that labour. A greater proportion of it must consequently belong to the
landlord.</p>
<p>All those improvements in the productive powers of labour, which tend
directly to reduce the rent price of manufactures, tend indirectly to
raise the real rent of land. The landlord exchanges that part of his rude
produce, which is over and above his own consumption, or, what comes to
the same thing, the price of that part of it, for manufactured produce.
Whatever reduces the real price of the latter, raises that of the former.
An equal quantity of the former becomes thereby equivalent to a greater
quantity of the latter; and the landlord is enabled to purchase a greater
quantity of the conveniencies, ornaments, or luxuries which he has
occasion for.</p>
<p>Every increase in the real wealth of the society, every increase in the
quantity of useful labour employed within it, tends indirectly to raise
the real rent of land. A certain proportion of this labour naturally goes
to the land. A greater number of men and cattle are employed in its
cultivation, the produce increases with the increase of the stock which is
thus employed in raising it, and the rent increases with the produce.</p>
<p>The contrary circumstances, the neglect of cultivation and improvement,
the fall in the real price of any part of the rude produce of land, the
rise in the real price of manufactures from the decay of manufacturing art
and industry, the declension of the real wealth of the society, all tend,
on the other hand, to lower the real rent of land, to reduce the real
wealth of the landlord, to diminish his power of purchasing either the
labour, or the produce of the labour, of other people.</p>
<p>The whole annual produce of the land and labour of every country, or, what
comes to the same thing, the whole price of that annual produce, naturally
divides itself, it has already been observed, into three parts; the rent
of land, the wages of labour, and the profits of stock; and constitutes a
revenue to three different orders of people; to those who live by rent, to
those who live by wages, and to those who live by profit. These are the
three great, original, and constituent, orders of every civilized society,
from whose revenue that of every other order is ultimately derived.</p>
<p>The interest of the first of those three great orders, it appears from
what has been just now said, is strictly and inseparably connected with
the general interest of the society. Whatever either promotes or obstructs
the one, necessarily promotes or obstructs the other. When the public
deliberates concerning any regulation of commerce or police, the
proprietors of land never can mislead it, with a view to promote the
interest of their own particular order; at least, if they have any
tolerable knowledge of that interest. They are, indeed, too often
defective in this tolerable knowledge. They are the only one of the three
orders whose revenue costs them neither labour nor care, but comes to
them, as it were, of its own accord, and independent of any plan or
project of their own. That indolence which is the natural effect of the
ease and security of their situation, renders them too often, not only
ignorant, but incapable of that application of mind, which is necessary in
order to foresee and understand the consequence of any public regulation.</p>
<p>The interest of the second order, that of those who live by wages, is as
strictly connected with the interest of the society as that of the first.
The wages of the labourer, it has already been shewn, are never so high as
when the demand for labour is continually rising, or when the quantity
employed is every year increasing considerably. When this real wealth of
the society becomes stationary, his wages are soon reduced to what is
barely enough to enable him to bring up a family, or to continue the race
of labourers. When the society declines, they fall even below this. The
order of proprietors may perhaps gain more by the prosperity of the
society than that of labourers; but there is no order that suffers so
cruelly from its decline. But though the interest of the labourer is
strictly connected with that of the society, he is incapable either of
comprehending that interest, or of understanding its connexion with his
own. His condition leaves him no time to receive the necessary
information, and his education and habits are commonly such as to render
him unfit to judge, even though he was fully informed. In the public
deliberations, therefore, his voice is little heard, and less regarded;
except upon particular occasions, when his clamour is animated, set on,
and supported by his employers, not for his, but their own particular
purposes.</p>
<p>His employers constitute the third order, that of those who live by
profit. It is the stock that is employed for the sake of profit, which
puts into motion the greater part of the useful labour of every society.
The plans and projects of the employers of stock regulate and direct all
the most important operation of labour, and profit is the end proposed by
all those plans and projects. But the rate of profit does not, like rent
and wages, rise with the prosperity, and fall with the declension of the
society. On the contrary, it is naturally low in rich, and high in poor
countries, and it is always highest in the countries which are going
fastest to ruin. The interest of this third order, therefore, has not the
same connexion with the general interest of the society, as that of the
other two. Merchants and master manufacturers are, in this order, the two
classes of people who commonly employ the largest capitals, and who by
their wealth draw to themselves the greatest share of the public
consideration. As during their whole lives they are engaged in plans and
projects, they have frequently more acuteness of understanding than the
greater part of country gentlemen. As their thoughts, however, are
commonly exercised rather about the interest of their own particular
branch of business. than about that of the society, their judgment, even
when given with the greatest candour (which it has not been upon every
occasion), is much more to be depended upon with regard to the former of
those two objects, than with regard to the latter. Their superiority over
the country gentleman is, not so much in their knowledge of the public
interest, as in their having a better knowledge of their own interest than
he has of his. It is by this superior knowledge of their own interest that
they have frequently imposed upon his generosity, and persuaded him to
give up both his own interest and that of the public, from a very simple
but honest conviction, that their interest, and not his, was the interest
of the public. The interest of the dealers, however, in any particular
branch of trade or manufactures, is always in some respects different
from, and even opposite to, that of the public. To widen the market, and
to narrow the competition, is always the interest of the dealers. To widen
the market may frequently be agreeable enough to the interest of the
public; but to narrow the competition must always be against it, and can
only serve to enable the dealers, by raising their profits above what they
naturally would be, to levy, for their own benefit, an absurd tax upon the
rest of their fellow-citizens. The proposal of any new law or regulation
of commerce which comes from this order, ought always to be listened to
with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having
been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but
with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose
interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have
generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public, and who
accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />