conflict of opinions among economists. Many, and perhaps a majority, of writers limit the term to material things. They make no account, in this respect, of those mental and moral acquisitions which constitute so large a proportion of the means of enjoyment and prosperity to humanity. The maker of a violin is in possession of an article which is to him a portion of wealth. But the skill and talent of Paganini, or Ole Bull, or any inferior musician who can so use the instrument as to gratify the popular taste, are not, on that account, reckoned by these writers as of any value in an economical sense; nor do these abilities constitute any part of the wealth of the community. Yet without this competence residing in some person, the violin could have no value. The same may be said concerning the abilities of various other classes who have acquired power to minister to the gratification of human desires. These are conditioned on labor, just as any kind of wealth is; and their utilities are not only just as real as those of material objects, but they are vastly more extensive. Without them, there would be no wealth worthy the name. These considerations lead to the following definition : Wealth comprises all those useful things and qualities, the attainment of which involves sacrifice on the part of man. As value implies a certain degree of resistance to man on the part of nature, so wealth implies in man a certain degree of power over nature. Hence Mr. Carey's statement, that wealth is "the power to command the always gratuitous services of nature." When man is at his weakest, socially or individually, nature does little for him. Every infant, if dependent on nature alone, would inevitably perish. In the infancy of society, it is only by the most strenuous exertion that a precarious subsistence is secured. But, with every increment of power in man, nature multiplies her services. They are not bought, but freely given, and given as soon as man is able to command them. In the most advanced civilization, the forces of nature have become so subservient to man, that, in thousands of cases, one can accomplish what a score, or sometimes even a hundred, could not formerly have done. It is this increase of power, more than that of material commodities, which constitutes the real wealth of the world. 9. It is easy to see, from what has already been said, that the proper subject of political economy is man. The laws pertaining to the underlying science are found in the character of man, his tastes, his desires, the motives influencing him, and the limitations to which he is subject. The results arrived at are, his happiness and prosperity, his freedom, and his mastery over nature. This view differs from that entertained by many writers. With them it is regarded as the science of material wealth, and man is treated only as an important incident. Yet social science, of which political economy is a branch, if it exists at all, is a science of man, and not of his accidents or appurtenances. 10. The word economy is from a Greek compound, and is nearly equivalent to our Saxon word husbandry. It has reference to the prudent management, by a householder, of his means, so as to secure the largest possible advantage for himself and his family. It is hardly necessary to remark, that economy is not the same as parsimony or frugality. It does not consist in mere abstinence for the sake of saving. It is rather a wise use of means and forces, so as to make them productive of the largest desired results. Political economy, as the name implies, has reference to man in society, and not as an individual. One of man's greatest needs perhaps his very greatest — is that of association. The solitary individual is only a minute constituent of man, in man's relation to the great purposes of life. Separated from his fellows, he would be, even in his individual capacity, but a small fraction of what he is when associated with them. No man is complete in himself. Each individual must be supplemented by others, generally by many others, and find a large part of his own competence in this association. Each has something that another lacks, and we are made to be sources of mutual supply to our several wants. But not only is association essential to man, but individuality is equally essential. A superficial thinker might regard these two characteristics as antagonistic. The fact is so far otherwise, that each of them is actually dependent on the other. No man would associate with another unless the one had something which the other wanted. But for this, there would be no commerce. Two hatters making the same kind of hats would neither of them have any thing which the other would want. Men of the same mental habits and requirements could not benefit one another. Men must differ, or they will not associate; and the greater the difference, the greater the association. On the other hand, it is only by association that the individual advances, and the highest development takes place. By such advancement and development, and by such only, the differences among men become great and numerous. In the lower grades of humanity, there is comparatively little difference between individuals; and there, too, the association is very slight. It is only in an advanced civilization that a strongly marked individuality exists, and that there are those numerous differences which make the mutual dependence the greatest. 11. Having given this brief general view of the subject, and defined some of its principal terms, we may now pro ceed with an examination of the principles involved in it. The subject is divided into four great branches, as follows: I. PRODUCTION, which treats of the creation of wealth. II. CONSUMPTION, which treats of the destruction of wealth, and the laws which govern it. III. EXCHANGE, which comprises the forms of commerce, or the transfer of commodities between different parties. IV. DISTRIBUTION, which has reference to the apportionment of wealth among the parties who produce it. |