chants can ever add to the stock of industry, however much they may abstract from the producers to enrich themselves.

The operations of stock brokers present another striking illustration of the fallacy of that position maintained by the adulators of the commercial interest. How immense are the transactions of these moneyagents! How extensive their influence-how momentous their movements-how decisive their conduct upon the questions of war and peace, and the final destiny of empires! It would be a curious subject for contemplation, to behold the method stated, by which these agents produce the wealth of society, which they so lavishly deal in. By forestalling the public funds, they compel the producer, who, by economy or superior industry and skill, saves a portion of his labour, to pay them a tax of 10, 15 or 20 per cent. for the privilege of buying a stock, which to hold, is so much less worth on his account. How is the wealth of a nation increased by the stock broker? This would be as difficult as to show how it is produced by the merchant. I am aware of a new-fangled doctrine that prevails in some minds, that whatever creates a demand for labour, increases the wealth of society; that the man of luxury, of fortune, of idleness, adds as much or more to the riches of a nation, than the most laborious operative. But a glaring fallacy is easily detected in this doctrine; for admit it to its fullest extent, and it is nothing more than the old principle of stimulating industry by the free circulation of labour, or the expenditure of capital. This doctrine we have already animadverted on; but it may still be susceptible of some remarks at a future day, that may exhibit its true features more distinctly.

Taylor, to whose excellent treatise I have before referred, makes this sagacious observation: "Poverty is justly exasperated against the wealth which caused it, but it temperately contemplates wealth flowing from industry and talents, and not from fraudulent laws. All laws are fraudulent that authorize monopolies. It knows that as one man's industry cannot make another man poorer, so wealth gotten by legal means, without industry, must. And if aristocracy is introduced into the United States by legal modes of dividing property, violent animosities between the rich and poor will attend it to a greater extent than in other countries, because the means of controlling them are less."

He continues-"By suffering industry to distribute property, industry will be created. It teaches no vice. It bestows health and content. It is a pledge of virtue. It doubles our happiness, by enabling us to blend it with the happiness of others. Its benefits reiterate and spread like the undulations of the waves. Yet the hags, feudality, hierarchy, privilege and stock, have successfully been preferred as regulators of property, to this charming Goddess. The distribution of property by law, first introduces in government what I call an aristocracy of parties."

Wealth gotten by legal means, (not industry) must make other men poorer. If the merchant is a nonproducer, as I conceive him to be, he can only become wealthy by other means, that is, by abstracting from the labour of others; by taking his ten per cent. for being the depositary of the products of labour. The proposition that industry shall distribute property, can hardly meet with an opponent, and forms the basis of a system of political economy that justice sanctions, and benevolence approves.

No writer on economy is superior to Alexander Hamilton in close analysis and comprehensive observation. His report on manufactures is a masterly demonstration of the fact for which I contend, although common sense acting upon obvious principles of labour, could readily arrive at the same conclusion, that mechanics, agriculture and manufactures, are the only sources of national wealth; for all the labour may be embraced within these three divisions. It is not necessary to quote from a treatise that has now become familiar to every reader, but it may not have been remarked by all, that this report contains not a solitary allusion to the merchant as a producer of industry; but on the contrary, the whole stress of his arguments bears upon the main principle, that labour is the sole cause of wealth.

I shall close this chapter by another apt quotation from Taylor." If equalizing and accumulating laws are the same in the principle, it is inconceivable how the same mind should be able to detest the one and approve the other. Integrity is compelled to reject both, and spurning at doctrines, calculated to excite the few to plunder the many, or the many to plunder the few, leaves every man under the strongest excitement to labour for his own and the national prosperity, from a conviction that the laws are a mantle of justice, and not an intricate net to fish for his earnings."

Our policy is founded upon the idea, that it is both wise and just, to leave the distribution of property to industry and talents; that what they acquire is all their own, except what they owe to society; that they owe nothing to society except a contribution equivalent to the necessities of government; that they owe nothing to monopoly, or exclusive privilege, in any form; and that whether they are despoiled by the rage of a mob,

or the laws of a separate interest, the genuine sanction of private property is equally violated."

It will have been observed throughout the foregoing reasoning, that I have drawn a palpable and wide distinction between commerce, the act and imode of foreign trade, and the merchant who acts as its agent. By commerce nations are enriched, and individuals raised from penury to opulence; not by the production of wealth, but by its acquisition. This acquisition arises from enhancement of values, caused by difference of climate, soils, genius and novelty. In a country that produces sugar and rum, but no grain, flour will be scarce, and bear a higher price than where it abounds, and the same of sugar in the climate which is uncongenial to its growth. Hence the profits of commerce, which give such animation to the world, and inspire labour with fresh ardour in the production of superabundance.

CHAPTER VI.

The Wages of Labour.

In all countries save this, the sons of labour have been the serfs of the land, the slaves of a master, or the inheritors of those brands of bondage, and badges of servility, which held them in a state very little superior to that of our southern negroes. The tenure of their existence was eternal toil; the recompense of their labour, a bare subsistence. The profit of their industry was the property of their master, their lord, their bishop, or their prince. Thus the wages of labour have almost universally been decided by power, instead of justice, and the smallest pittance compatible with life, has been allotted to the children of industry.

He who depends upon power will not fail to be visited with oppression; and the people of Europe, in common with ourselves, still feel the iron pressure of customs and laws, which had their origin in the arbitrary will of her barons. The practices of the powerful are hard to obliterate, and seldom relax; they become identified with the common law, they insinuate themselves into our constitutions, and descend to the latest posterity, like the curse of Cain, or the poison of consuming disease. The origin of the wages of labour came from masters, not less absolute than a South Carolina slave-holder; and not more disposed to allot to the labourer more liberal wages, than the lords of the

M