society。 And； if the polity occupies a completely isolated area of the
earth's surface； the numerical strength of that polity can never
exceed the quotient of the maximum quantity of food…stuffs producible
by the green plants on that area； in each year； divided by the
quantity necessary for the maintenance of each person during the year。
But； there is a third mode of existence possible to a polity； it may；
conceivably； be neither purely pastoral nor purely agricultural； but
purely manufacturing。 Let us suppose three islands； like Gran Canaria；
Teneriffe and Lanzerote； in the Canaries； to be quite cut off from the
rest of the world。 Let Gran Canaria be ＇164＇ inhabited by
grain…raisers； Teneriffe by cattle…breeders； while the population of
Lanzerote （which we may suppose to be utterly barren） consists of
carpenters； woollen manufacturers； and shoemakers。 Then the facts of
daily experience teach us that the people of Lanzerote could never
have existed unless they came to the island provided with a stock of
food…stuffs； and that they could not continue to exist； unless that
stock； as it was consumed； was made up by contributions from the vital
capital of either Gran Canaria； or Teneriffe； or both。 Moreover； the
carpenters of Lanzerote could do nothing； unless they were provided
with wood from the other islands； nor could the wool spinners and
weavers or the shoemakers work without wool and skins from the same
sources。 The wood and the wool and the skins are； in fact； the capital
without which their work as manufacturers in their respective trades
is impossibleso that the vital and other capital supplied by Gran
Canaria and Teneriffe is most indubitably the necessary antecedent of
the industrial labour of Lanzerote。 It is perfectly true that by the
time the wood； the wool； and the skins reached Lanzerote a good deal
of labour in cutting； shearing； skinning； transport； and so on； would
have been spent upon them。 But this does not alter the fact that the
only 〃production〃 which is essential to the existence of the
population of Teneriffe and Gran Canaria is that effected by the ＇165＇
green plants in both islands； and that all the labour spent upon the
raw produce useful in manufacture； directly or indirectly yielded by
themby the inhabitants of these islands and by those of Lanzerote
into the bargainwill not provide one solitary Lanzerotian with a
dinner； unless the Teneriffians and Canariotes happen to want his
goods and to be willing to give some of their vital capital in
exchange for them。
Under the circumstances defined； if Teneriffe and Gran Canaria
disappeared； or if their inhabitants ceased to care for carpentry；
clothing； or shoes； the people of Lanzerote must starve。 But if they
wish to buy； then the Lanzerotians； by 〃cultivating〃 the buyers；
indirectly favour the cultivation of the produce of those buyers。
Thus； if the question is asked whether the labour employed in
manufacture in Lanzerote is 〃productive〃 or 〃unproductive〃 there can
be only one reply。 If anybody will exchange vital capital； or that
which can be exchanged for vital capital； for Lanzerote goods； it is
productive； if not； it is unproductive。
In the case of the manufacturer； the dependence of labour upon capital
is still more intimate than in that of the herdsman or agriculturist。
When the latter are once started they can go on； without troubling
themselves about the existence of any other people。 But the
manufacturer depends on pre…existing capital； not only at the ＇166＇
beginning； but at the end of his operations。 However great the
expenditure of his labour and of his skill； the result； for the
purpose of maintaining his existence； is just the same as if he had
done nothing； unless there is a customer able and willing to exchange
food…stuffs for that which his labour and skill have achieved。
There is another point concerning which it is very necessary to have
clear ideas。 Suppose a carpenter in Lanzerote to be engaged in making
chests of drawers。 Let us suppose that a； the timber； and b； the grain
and meat needful for the man's sustenance until he can finish a chest
of drawers； have to be paid for by that chest。 Then the capital with
which he starts is represented by a ＋ b。 He could not start at all
unless he had it； day by day； he must destroy more or less of the
substance and of the general adaptability of a in order to work it up
into the special forms needed to constitute the chest of drawers； and；
day by day； he must use up at least so much of b as will replace his
loss of vital capital by the work of that day。 Suppose it takes the
carpenter and his workmen ten days to saw up the timber； to plane the
boards； and to give them the shape and size proper for the various
parts of the chest of drawers。 And suppose that he then offers his
heap of boards to the advancer of a ＋ b as an equivalent for the wood
＋ ten days' supply of vital capital？ The latter will surely say： 〃No。
＇167＇ I did not ask for a heap of boards。 I asked for a chest of
drawers。 Up to this time； so far as I am concerned； you have done
nothing and are as much in my debt as ever。〃 And if the carpenter
maintained that he had 〃virtually〃 created two…thirds of a chest of
drawers； inasmuch as it would take only five days more to put together
the pieces of wood； and that the heap of boards ought to be accepted
as the equivalent of two…thirds of his debt； I am afraid the creditor
would regard him as little better than an impudent swindler。 It
obviously makes no sort of difference whether the Canariote or
Teneriffian buyer advanced the wood and the food…stuffs； on which the
carpenter had to maintain himself； or whether the carpenter had a stock
of both； the consumption of which must be recouped by the exchange of
a chest of drawers for a fresh supply。 In the latter case； it is even
less doubtful that； if the carpenter offered his boards to the man who
wanted a chest of drawers； the latter would laugh in his face。 And if
he took the chest of drawers for himself； then so much of his vital
capital would be sunk in it past recovery。 Again； the payment of goods
in a lump； for the chest of drawers； comes to the same thing as the
payment of daily wages for the fifteen days that the carpenter was
occupied in making it。 If； at the end of each day； the carpenter chose
to say to himself 〃I have 'virtually' created； by my day's labour； a
fifteenth of what I shall get for the chest ＇168＇ of
drawerstherefore my wages are the produce of my day's labour〃there
is no great harm in such metaphorical speech； so long as the poor man
does not delude himself into the supposition that it represents the
exact truth。 〃Virtually〃 is apt to cover more intellectual sins than
〃charity〃 does moral delicts。 After what has been said； it surely must
be plain enough that each day's work has involved the consumption of
the carpenter's vital capital； and the fashioning of his timber； at
the expense of more or less consumption of those forms of capital。
Whether the a ＋ b to be exchanged for the chest has been advanced as a
loan； or is paid daily or weekly as wages； or； at some later time； as
the price of a finished commoditythe essential element of the
transaction； and the only essential element； is； that it must； at
least； effect the replacement of the vital capital consumed。 Neither
boards nor chest of drawers are eatable； and； so far from the
carpenter having produced the essential part of his wages by each
day's labour； he has merely wasted that labour； unless somebody who
happens to want a chest of drawers offers to exchange vital capital；
or something that can procure it； equivalent to the amount consumed
during the process of manufacture。*
* See the discussion of this subject further on。
That it should be necessary； at this time of day； to set forth such
elementary truths as these may ＇169＇ well seem strange； but no one who
consults that interesting museum of political delusions； 〃Progress and
Poverty；〃 some of the treasures of which I have already brought to
light； will doubt the fact； if he bestows proper attention upon the
first book of that widely…read work。 At page 15 it is thus written：
〃The proposition I shall endeavour to prove is： that wages； instead of
being drawn from capital； are； in reality； drawn from the product of
the labour for which they are paid。〃
Again at page 18：
〃In every case in which labour is exchanged for commodities；
production really precedes enjoyment 。 。 。 wages are the
earningsthat is to say； the makingsof labournot the advances
of capital。〃
And the proposition which the author endeavours to disprove is the
hitherto generally accepted doctrine
。。。〃that labour is maintained and paid out of existing capital；
before the product which constitutes the ultimate object is
secured〃 （p。 16）。
The doctrine respecting the relation of capital and wages； which is
thus opposed in 〃Progress and Poverty；〃 is that illustrated in the
foregoing pages； the truth of which； I conceive； must be plain to any
one who has apprehended the very simple arguments by which I have
endeavoured to ＇170＇ demonstrate it。 One conclusion or the other must
be ho