G32

THE NATU11K A X 0 CAUSES OE

of manufactures it necessarily sinks the real value of the sur-plus produce of its own land, with which, or, what comes tothe same thing, with the price of which, it purchases thoseforeign goods and manufactures. Secondly, by giving a sortof monopoly of the home market to its own merchants, ar-tificers, and manufacturers, it raises the rate of mercantileand manufacturingprofit, in proportion to that of agriculturalprofit, and consequently either draws from agriculture a partof the capital which had before been employed in it, or hin-ders from going to it a part of what would otherwise havegone to it. This policy, therefore, discourages agriculturein two different ways; first, by sinking the real value of itsproduce, and thereby lowering the rate of its profits; and,secondly, by raising the rate of profit in all other employments.Agriculture is rendered less advantageous, and trade andmanufactures more advantageous than they otherwise wouldbe; and every man is tempted by his own interest to turn,as much as he can, both his capital and his industry from theformer to the latter employments.

Though, by this oppressive policy, a landed nation shouldbe able to raise up artificers, manufacturers, and merchantsof its own, somewhat sooner than it could do by the freedomof trade : a matter, however, -which is not a little doubtful;yet it would raise them up, if one may say so, prematurely,and before it was perfectly ripe for them. By raising up toohastily one species of industry, it would depress anothermore valuable species of industry. By raising up too hastilya species of industry which only replaces the stock whichemploys it, together with the ordinary profit, it would de-press a species of industry which, over and above replacingthat stock with its profit, affords likewise a neat produce, afree rent to the landlord. It would depress productive la-bour, by encouraging too hastily that labour which is alto-gether barren and unproductive.

In what manner, according to this system, the sum totalof the annual produce of the land is distributed among thethree classes above-mentioned, and in what manner the la-bour of the unproductive class does no more than replace thevalue of its own cpnsumption, without increasing in any re-spect the value of that sum total, is represented by Mr.Quesnai, the very ingenious and profound author of thissystem, in some arithmetical formularies. The first of thesefonnularies, which by way of eminence he peculiarly distin-