Page:The Economist 1843-08- Vol 1 Preliminary Number (IA sim economist 1843-08 1 preliminary-number).pdf/6

 ceases: and the capital invested in them is so long an absolute abstraction of national wealth. With a given amount of trade all this wealth is secure, with a little less it vanishes. And let us well consider that it is not the mere surplus of these various interests that thus suffers, for no man will consent voluntarily to be the surplus:—no man will close his factory, blow out his furnace, lay by his pit, or lay up his ship, until they become a source of loss. It is true the weakest must go first: the worst factory must be closed, the poorest mines must be laid by, and the worst ship must be laid up first; and then follow the next in degree; but the moment a little diminution of supply lessens the loss, a portion of the idle start afresh into competition. It may be coolly said, this state of things must cure itself in time, if it were only by a course of ruin; but, be it remembered, the population still goes on increasing, ingenuity and invention are still at the highest pressure of necessity, and as one class of competitors are destroyed, another class are immediately in their place. We can safely refer to each and all of these interests, if this is not a literal description of their present condition. The want of more trade prevents that trade we have being profitable: the excess of produce beyond the demand lessens the value of the whole producing ability; and this must continue as long as demand keeps not pace with production, as long as no effort is made to extend our markets, as our population and productive ability increase. But inasmuch as consumption is only created by production, the two should always in a natural state of things keep pace with each other; the demand for productions should always increase as they become abundant and cheap, for abundanceimplies great production, and great production an extensive means of consumption. Then why do we find this country so great an exception to this natural law? Because by our

we limit the supply of one great class of productions, and thus practically limit the demand for all others, however much we affect to encourage our commerce. During the last thirty years one great class of producers at home has been limited by the nature of the country and Acts of Parliament. The land has given employment to no portion of the increase of the population: the whole additional six millions of our people, since 1821, have been thrown upon other employments. In 1821, 4,790,000 of the population were engaged in producing food for, and consuming the products of the remaining 9,600,000: in 1812 the number of 4,790,000 of producers of food and consumers of manufactures is somewhat recluced, while the consumers of food, irrespective of the producers, are increased to 11,100,000; but the law practically enacts that the 14,100,000 in 1812 shall be feel by the same means that fed the 11,600,000 in 1821; and moreover, for such is the effect, that in 1812, 14,400,000 manufacturers, dealers, various producers, professions, &c., shall only have the same number of customers with whom to exchange for the first great necessaries of life as the 9,600,000 had twenty years ago; and thus there has been a constant tendency for the produce of the rapidly increasing number to exchange for a smaller quantity of the produce of the stationary mmber, or, in other words, while agricultural produce has all along maintained a high price, all other kinds of goods have fallen rapidly during the period; and the demand being thus far stationary, while the supplies were increasing so much, there was a constant tendency during the whole period to an excess of production on one hand, only because the same constant tendency existed to a limited and deficient production on the other hand. Had the producers of food kept in the same proportionate increase of numbers and quantity as the other class, there had remained the same relative value and demand for the produce of each, and excess or over-production would not have arisen in the one case nor deficiency in the other. This excess, or what is termed over-production is precisely that surplus which we have before shown has been so long, and still is, undermining the commercial and industrial existence of the country:—for however great the struggle may be among farmers to ocenpy, or of labourers to cultivate, this fixed quantity of land, their numbers do not increase: they only require the same number of ploughshares, the same quantity of saddlery, the same number is still only to be shod and booted, still only the fixed number of backs to be clothed, still only the same number of consumers of colonial produce; while the class who depend for food on this fixed number, and who seek to minister to their wants of ploughshares, of saddlery, of shoes, of clothing, who import and supply foreign produce, and have other occupations, are six millions more since 1821, and still increase at the rate of one thousand per day. In another eight years, if the increase goes on in the same proportion, in 1851, while the food producers remain at 4,790,000, the other classes will have increased to 17,000,000; and if it be possible that suicidal restriction and monopoly still prevail, it must require a still larger portion of the conflict of the large class to obtain the produce and minister to the wants of the smaller class; and it is an important fact, that the great competition to occupy, and to labour upon, this fixed quantity of land, has a constant tendency to keep the largest portion of even this smallest class in the utmost poverty and depression.

Thus far as regards the power of exchange in the home trade for the first great article of food:—next as to the greatest foreign article of consumption, and therefore of exchangeable ability,. Here again the same principle has been acted upon, the same result has followed. Restriction and monopoly have again here attempted to confine the supply of the 27,000,000, which we now are, to the same means which supplied 21,000,000, twenty years ago. In 1821, the quantity of sugar available for the consumption of 21,000,000 of people was 4,176,178 cwts.—in 1812 the quantity similarly available for the consumption of 27,000,000 was only 4,082,312 cwts., being actually 93,866 ewts. less. The competition, therefore, of 27,000,000 to obtain only the same or a less quantity in exchange for their articles of produce, las