this way the anchor is drawn up in a comparatively short time. If one man attempted to draw up the anchor by himself his labour would be thrown away.

Simple and complex Cooperation of Labour. kinds of Cooperation of labour;

There are two

Ist, Simple Cooperation; or the cooperation which takes place when several persons help each other in the same employment; for instance, in lifting a heavy weight or in hauling up an anchor, as in the example just given.

2nd, Complex Cooperation; or the cooperation which takes place when several persons help each other in different employments. An instance of complex cooperation of labour may be found in the labour which is employed to manufacture a piece of cotton cloth. In this case many different kinds of labour, employed in different ways and in different places, combine or cooperate together. Those who sow the cotton seed, and after the pod is ripe pack it in bales for exportation; the sailors who convey it from America to England; the artisans who perform so many operations upon the raw cotton before it is converted into cloth, combine their labour in order to produce a piece of calico. Another instance of complex cooperation, or several persons helping each other in different employments, is found in the assistance which agricultural labour and manufacturing labour render each other. In other words, when "one body of men having combined their labour to produce more food than they require, another body of men are induced to combine their labour for the purpose of producing more clothes than they require, and with those surplus clothes buying the surplus food of the other body of labourers."

Mr Wakefield's theory of Colonization. A consideration of the mutual benefits which town and country labourers derive by exchanging the surplus products of their industry forms the basis of Mr Wakefield's theory of Colonization.

Mr Wakefield pointed out that the plan of granting to each family of settlers in a new colony a tract of fertile land, large enough to supply all its wants, tends directly to discourage the growth of commerce and the progress of civilization. A certain amount of rude abundance is obtained,

but each family being isolated and independent there is neither inducement nor opportunity for enterprise, and no motive to produce more than is required for the consumption of the household. To remedy this Mr Wakefield proposed that, as far as possible, there should be, in every colony, a town population side by side with the agricultural population. Division of labour would thus be greatly encouraged, and production would be stimulated, for a market would be found for the sale of agricultural produce in the town; the inhabitants of which would in return be compelled to exchange some articles of manufacturing industry.

The use of Tools and Machinery. Having mentioned two causes which act very powerfully in increasing the productiveness of labour, viz. Division of Labour and Cooperation of Labour, we now pass to a third, the importance of which must be evident to all; viz. the use of tools and machinery. There is no industry which is independent of the use of tools; even the rudest agriculture could not be carried on without a spade, nor the plainest sewing without a needle; and in nearly all branches of industry the introduction of elaborate machinery is rapidly becoming general. There are two ways in which machinery increases the productiveness of labour. One in which it supersedes or takes the place of the labour of individuals, as in the case of the reaping machine, or the sewing machine; and the other in which machinery achieves that which no amount of unassisted human labour could perform; such as propelling an express train at sixty miles an hour. In the first case machinery, by enabling a few persons to do the work previously performed by a great many, sets free a large quantity of labour, which seeks employment in other directions. In the second case it opens new fields of enterprise, which tend to absorb the labour set free by the introduction of machinery into other industries.

The productive power of Labour is increased by the skill, intelligence, morality, and trustworthiness of the labourer. The three principal material agencies have now been mentioned which increase the productive power of labour. But there are other than material agencies, which must not be passed

over. These are the skill, intelligence, morality, and trustworthiness of the labourer.

That the skill of the workman increases the productive power of labour is so self-evident as scarcely to need illustration. In many industries the necessary skill cannot be acquired without a long apprenticeship, and it is frequently several years before the labour of the apprentice is remunerative to his master; for from want of skill the apprentice frequently spoils the materials of his industry.

The Intelligence of the Labourer. The importance of the diffusion of intelligence among the workmen, as a means of increasing the productiveness of labour, can hardly be exaggerated. An unintelligent workman performs his task mechanically; he does what he has learnt to do, and no more; he suggests no improvements. If the industry in which he is engaged becomes depressed and he consequently loses his employment, he can turn his hand to nothing else; and he and his family soon become dependent on the rates, or on private charity.

The morality of the Labourer. The morality of the labourer is also an important agent in increasing the productiveness of labour. All intemperance greatly diminishes physical strength. The habitual drunkard is usually incapable, even when he is sober, of performing any severe labour, and habits of intemperance nearly always produce premature decay and death. The morality and the intelligence of the labourer are intimately connected with each other. An unintelligent person can never enter into intellectual enjoyment, and can seldom appreciate innocent pleasures. The general diffusion of education is very important from the economical, as well as from other points of view. Education stimulates the intelligence and thus makes the labourer more efficient ; it also tends to make him more temperate, because it opens to him new sources of healthy and innocent pleasure and recreation.

The value of Trustworthiness in the Labourer. The untrustworthiness of the labourer renders it necessary to employ persons whose only business is to see that the labourers do their work. If people could be trusted, the labour of over

looking and watching might be saved, and drafted off to some other employment. It must also be remembered that if labourers require to be watched they will always find opportunities of shirking their work, no matter how careful the overlooker may be. This is particularly the case in agricul ture, where the nature of the various occupations, and the great distance over which the labourers are scattered, render supervision extremely difficult.

Before leaving the subject of productive and unproductive labour, it may be well again to enumerate those causes which increase the productiveness of labour. These causes are divided into two classes:

The Division of Labour. | The Skill,
The Cooperation of La- The Intelligence,

bour.

The Morality,

The Use of Machinery The Trustwor

and Tools.

thiness

of the

Labourer.

Having now discussed the meaning of the terms productive and unproductive labour, it will be necessary, before investigating the functions of capital, that the student should know what is meant by Productive and Unproductive Consumption.

Productive and Unproductive Consumption. The distinction between productive and unproductive labour must be borne in mind, and it will then be seen that the productive labourer is also the productive consumer, and vice versâ. All the consumption of the productive labourer is not productive consumption, but only that part of it which is employed in sustaining him whilst he is engaged in production. All luxuries must be consumed unproductively, because the consumption of them does not assist future production. All waste is unproductive consumption; and instead, as some suppose, of being beneficial to society, is in reality injurious to it. If the mere consumption of commodities were productive of wealth, no matter whether the object for which they are consumed is useful or not, the quickest way for a nation to become rich would be to burn down houses, manufactories, and public buildings, destroy the railways and docks, and

pull down the telegraph-wires. There can be little doubt that such conduct would soon produce great activity in the building and engineering trades; but their gain would be at the expense of the general loss. An American paper, after the great fire at Chicago, remarked what an excellent thing that great calamity had been for the building trade. The writer did not seem to remember that all that the building trade gained and much more, had been lost by the owners of the property that had been burnt. These remarks may be concluded by a very excellent illustration in explanation of this point taken from the writings of M. F. Bastiat: "Have you ever witnessed the anger of the good shopkeeper Jacques Bonhomme, when his careless son happened to break a square of glass? If you have been present at such a scene, you will most assuredly bear witness to the fact, that every one of the spectators, were there even thirty of them, by common consent apparently, offered the unfortunate owner this invariable consolation, 'It is an ill wind that blows nobody good. Everybody must live, and what would become of the glaziers if panes of glass were never broken?' Now this form of condolence contains an entire theory which it will be well to shew up in this simple case.

Suppose it cost 6 francs to repair the damage, you say that the accident brings 6 francs to the glazier's trade—that it encourages that trade to the amount of 6 francs-I grant it. I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly. The glazier comes; performs his task; receives his 6 francs; rubs his hands; and, in his heart, blesses the careless child. All this is that which is seen. But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, 'Stop there! your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen.'

"It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent 6 francs upon one thing he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace he would perhaps have replaced his old shoes, or added