"We derive from Dr.Smith no assistance in forming our opinions on this important subject; for he seems to have had no fixed ideas in relation to it.Indeed, there is no opinion that has been any where maintained on the subject of the sources of national wealth, which does not appear to have been adopted in different parts of the Inquiry into the Wealth of Nations.
1."The annual labor of every nation is" at one time stated to be "the fired which originally supplies it with all the necessaries and conveniences of life which it annually consumes, and which consists always either in the immediate produce of that labor, or in what is purchased with that produce from other nations." (164)2.Lands, mines, and fisheries, elsewhere are regarded as replacing, "with a profit, not only the capitals employed in them, but all the other capitals employed in the community." (165) That, however, which replaces all the capitals employed in the community, and is the source from whence they derive their profit, must be the sole source of wealth.Mankind are, therefore, here considered as deriving the whole of their wealth from land.(166)3.Again, plain reason is stated to dictate, that the real wealth of a country consists in the annual produce of its land and labor; and this opinion, which coincides with that of the Bishop of Cloyne, (167) and the learned author (168) of the Essay on Money and Coin, is most generally adhered to by Dr.Smith.
4.In another part of the work, however, we find it asserted, that "land and capital stock are the two original sources of all revenue, both private and public: capital stock pays the wages of productive labor, whether employed in agriculture, manufactures, or commerce." (169) Land and capital are, therefore, here deemed the sole sources of wealth;and labor is considered as deriving from them its wages, without adding to the opulence of the community.
5.Lastly, we are taught to consider land, labor, and capital, as being all three sources of wealth; for we are told that, "whoever derives his revenue from a fund that is his own, must draw it either from his labor, his stock, or his land.The revenue derived from labor is called wages;that from stock, profit; and from land, rent;" (170) an opinion which seems to have been hinted at by Sir William Petty, (171) when he stated it as an impediment to the wealth of England, that taxes were not levied upon lands, stock, and labor, but chiefly upon land alone, though land and labor are generally considered by that ingenious writer as the sole source of wealth.
In treating of political economy, the science which professes to display and to teach means of increasing the wealth of a state, it would seem that the first and most anxious object of inquiry ought to have been, what wealth is, and from what sources mankind derive it? for it appears impossible to discuss with precision the means of increasing any thing, without an accurate notion of its nature and of its origin." Lauderdale.
To this catalogue of the various notions held out in the Wealth of Nations, concerning the nature of that wealth, Lord Lauderdale might have added another, showing some general resemblance to that exhibited in the present work."Wealth," we are told, B.V.c.i., "always follows improvements of agriculture and manufactures, and is, in reality, no more than the accumulated produce of those improvements."NOTE B.
"Si l' on se demande en effet en quoi consiste la richesse, on n'est pas peu surpris de ne trouver dans les auteurs les plus estimés que des opinions differentes ou contraires.
"Les uns la font consister dans l'universalité des propriétés privées, (172) et d'autrcs dans l'abondance des denrées.(173)"Ceux-là distinguent la richesse publique de la richesse particulière, donnent à la prcmière une valeur d'usage et non d'échange, et non la seconde une valeur d'échange et non d'usage, et font consister cette dernière dans la valeur vénale du produit net.(174)"Ceux-ci la composent de toutes les choses matérielles dont l'homme pout faire usage pour satisfaire un besoin ou une jouissauce de sensualité, de fantaisic ou de vanité.(175)"Un autre écrivain regarde la richesse comme la possession.d'une chose plus désirée par crux qui ne l'ont pas que par ceux qui en jouissent.(176)"Un autre écrivain la définit le superflu.(177)"Un autre écrivain la place dans l'accumulation du travail exigible.(178)"Adam-Smith dit tantôt qu'un homme est riche ou pauvre selon le plus ou moins de choses nécessaires, utiles ou agréables à la vie dont il peut se procurer la jouissance; tantôt qu'un homme est riche ou pauvre selon qu'il peut disposer de plus ou moins de travail; tantôt que la richesse réelle d'un pays consiste dans le produit annuel de ses terres et de son travail.(179)"Un écrevain récent définit la richesse, tout ce que l'homme désire comme utile et agréable.(180)"Les richesses, dit M.Say, se composent des choses qui ont une valeur.(181)"M.Ricardo pense que la valeur diffère essentiellement de la richesse, et que les choses, une lois qu'elles sont reconnues utiles par elles-mêmes, tirent leur valeur échangeable de deux sources, de leur rareté, et de la quantité de travail nécessaire pour les acquêrir.(182)"M.Sismondi définit la richesse, le fruit du travail accumuléet non encore consommé.(183)
"Cette incertitude sur la nature de la richesse se reproduit dans l'examen des moyens qui peuvent contribuer á sa progression, á son accroissement et á sa grandeur.
