Inthefirstplace，then，thisviewofthingsgreatly
　　weakens，inawealthyandindustriouscountry，theforceofthe
　　economicalargumentagainsttheexpenditureofpublicmoneyfor
　　reallyvaluable，eventhoughindustriouslyunproductive，
　　purposes。Ifforanygreatobjectofjusticeorphilanthropic
　　policy，suchastheindustrialregenerationofIreland，ora
　　comprehensivemeasureofcolonizationorofpubliceducation，it
　　wereproposedtoraisealargesumbywayofloan，politicians
　　neednotdemurtotheabstractionofsomuchcapital，astending
　　todryupthepermanentsourcesofthecountry’swealth，and
　　diminishthefundwhichsuppliesthesubsistenceofthelabouring
　　population。Theutmostexpensewhichcouldberequisiteforany
　　ofthesepurposes，wouldnotinallprobabilitydepriveone
　　labourerofemployment，ordiminishthenextyear’sproductionby
　　oneellofclothoronebushelofgrain。Inpoorcountries，the
　　capitalofthecountryrequiresthelegislator’ssedulouscare;
　　heisboundtobemostcautiousofencroachinguponit，and
　　shouldfavourtotheutmostitsaccumulationathome，andits
　　introductionfromabroad。Butinrich，populous，andhighly
　　cultivatedcountries，itisnotcapitalwhichisthedeficient
　　element，butfertileland;andwhatthelegislatorshoulddesire
　　andpromote，isnotagreateraggregatesaving，butagreater
　　returntosavings，eitherbyimprovedcultivation，orbyaccess
　　totheproduceofmorefertilelandsinotherpartsoftheglobe。
　　Insuchcountries，thegovernmentmaytakeanymoderateportion
　　ofthecapitalofthecountryandexpenditasrevenue，without
　　affectingthenationalwealth:thewholebeingeitherdrawnfrom
　　thatportionoftheannualsavingswhichwouldotherwisebesent
　　abroad，orbeingsubtractedfromtheunproductiveexpenditureof
　　individualsforthenextyearortwo，sinceeverymillionspent
　　makesroomforanothermilliontobesavedbeforereachingthe
　　overflowingpoint。Whentheobjectinviewisworththesacrifice
　　ofsuchanamountoftheexpenditurethatfurnishesthedaily
　　enjoymentsofthepeople，theonlywell—groundedeconomical
　　objectionagainsttakingthenecessaryfundsdirectlyfrom
　　capital，consistsoftheinconveniencesattendingtheprocessof
　　raisingarevenuebytaxation，topaytheinterestofadebt。
　　Thesameconsiderationsenableustothrowasideasunworthy
　　ofregard，oneofthecommonargumentsagainstemigrationasa
　　meansofreliefforthelabouringclass。Emigration，itissaid，
　　candonogoodtothelabourers，if，inordertodefraythecost，
　　asmuchmustbetakenawayfromthecapitalofthecountryas
　　fromitspopulation。Thatanythinglikethisproportioncould
　　requiretobeabstractedfromcapitalforthepurposeevenofthe
　　mostextensivecolonization，few，Ishouldthink，wouldnow
　　assert:butevenonthatuntenablesupposition，itisanerrorto
　　supposethatnobenefitwouldbeconferredonthelabouring
　　class。Ifone—tenthofthelabouringpeopleofEnglandwere
　　transferredtothecolonies，andalongwiththemone—tenthofthe
　　circulatingcapitalofthecountry，eitherwages，orprofits，or
　　both，wouldbegreatlybenefited，bythediminishedpressureof
　　capitalandpopulationuponthefertilityoftheland。There
　　wouldbeareduceddemandforfood:theinferiorarablelands
　　wouldbethrownoutofcultivation，andwouldbecomepasture;the
　　superiorwouldbecultivatedlesshighly，butwithagreater
　　proportionalreturn;foodwouldbeloweredinprice，andthough
　　moneywageswouldnotrise，everylabourerwouldbeconsiderably
　　improvedincircumstances，animprovementwhich，ifnoincreased
　　stimulustopopulationandfallofwagesensued，wouldbe
　　permanent;whileiftheredid，profitswouldrise，and
　　accumulationstartforwardsoastorepairthelossofcapital。
　　Thelandlordsalonewouldsustainsomelossofincome;andeven
　　they，onlyifcolonizationwenttothelengthofactually
　　diminishingcapitalandpopulation，butnotifitmerelycarried
　　offtheannualincrease。
　　2。Fromthesameprincipleswearenowabletoarriveata
　　finalconclusionrespectingtheeffectswhichmachinery，and
　　generallythesinkingofcapitalforaproductivepurpose，
　　produceupontheimmediateandultimateinterestsofthe
　　labouringclass。Thecharacteristicpropertyofthisclassof
　　industrialimprovementsistheconversionofcirculatingcapital
　　intofixed:anditwasshowninthefirstBook，thatinacountry
　　wherecapitalaccumulatesslowly，theintroductionofmachinery，
　　permanentimprovementsofland，andthelike，mightbe，forthe
　　time，extremelyinjurious;sincethecapitalsoemployedmightbe
　　directlytakenfromthewagesfund，thesubsistenceofthepeople
　　andtheemploymentforlabourcurtailed，andthegrossannual
　　produceofthecountryactuallydiminished。Butinacountryof
　　greatannualsavingsandlowprofits，nosucheffectsneedbe
　　apprehended。Sinceeventheemigrationofcapital，orits
　　unproductiveexpenditure，oritsabsolutewaste，donotinsucha
　　country，ifconfinedwithinanymoderatebounds，atalldiminish
　　theaggregateamountofthewagesfund——stilllesscanthemere
　　conversionofalikesumintofixedcapital，whichcontinuesto
　　beproductive，havethateffect。Itmerelydrawsoffatone
　　orificewhatwasalreadyflowingoutatanother;orifnot，the
　　greatervacantspaceleftinthereservoirdoesbutcausea
　　greaterquantitytoflowin。Accordingly，inspiteofthe
　　mischievousderangementsofthemoney—marketwhichwereatone
　　timeoccasionedbythesinkingofgreatsumsinrailways，Iwas
　　neverabletoagreewiththosewhoapprehendedmischief，from
　　thissource，totheproductiveresourcesofthecountry。Noton
　　theabsurdground（whichtoanyoneacquaintedwiththeelements
　　ofthesubjectneedsnoconfutation）thatrailwayexpenditureis
　　ameretransferofcapitalfromhandtohand，bywhichnothingis
　　lostordestroyed。Thisistrueofwhatisspentinthepurchase
　　oftheland;aportiontooofwhatispaidtoparliamentary
　　agents，counsel，engineers，andsurveyors，issavedbythosewho
　　receiveit，andbecomescapitalagain:butwhatislaidoutin
　　thebonafideconstructionoftherailwayitself，islostand
　　gone;whenonceexpended，itisincapableofeverbeingpaidin
　　wagesorappliedtothemaintenanceoflabourersagain;asa
　　matterofaccount，theresultisthatsomuchfoodandclothing
　　andtoolshavebeenconsumed，andthecountryhasgotarailway
　　instead。ButwhatIwouldurgeis，thatsumssoappliedare
　　mostlyamereappropriationoftheannualoverflowingwhichwould
　　otherwisehavegoneabroad，orbeenthrownawayunprofitably，
　　leavingneitherarailwaynoranyothertangibleresult。The
　　railwaygamblingof1844and1845probablysavedthecountryfrom
　　adepressionofprofitsandinterest，andariseofallpublic
　　andprivatesecurities，whichwouldhaveengenderedstillwilder
　　speculations，andwhentheeffectscameafterwardstobe
　　complicatedbythescarcityoffood，wouldhaveendedinastill
　　moreformidablecrisisthanwasexperiencedintheyears
　　immediatelyfollowing。InthepoorercountriesofEurope，the
　　rageforrailwayconstructionmighthavehadworseconsequences
　　thaninEngland，wereitnotthatinthosecountriessuch
　　enterprisesareinagreatmeasurecarriedonbyforeigncapital。
　　Therailwayoperationsofthevariousnationsoftheworldmaybe
　　lookeduponasasortofcompetitionfortheoverflowingcapital
　　ofthecountrieswhereprofitislowandcapitalabundant，as
　　EnglandandHolland。TheEnglishrailwayspeculationsarea
　　struggletokeepourannualincreaseofcapitalathome;thoseof
　　foreigncountriesareanefforttoobtainit。（1*）
　　Italreadyappearsfromtheseconsiderations，thatthe
　　conversionofcirculatingcapitalintofixed，whetherby
　　railways，ormanufactories，orships，ormachinery，orcanals，or
　　mines，orworksofdrainageandirrigation，isnotlikely，inany
　　richcountry，todiminishthegrossproduceortheamountof
　　employmentforlabour。Howmuchthenisthecasestrengthened，
　　whenweconsiderthatthesetransformationsofcapitalareofthe
　　natureofimprovementsinproduction，which，insteadof
　　ultimatelydiminishingcirculatingcapital，arethenecessary
　　conditionsofitsincrease，sincetheyaloneenableacountryto
　　possessaconstantlyaugmentingcapitalwithoutreducingprofits
　　totheratewhichwouldcauseaccumulationtostop。Thereis
　　hardlyanyincreaseoffixedcapitalwhichdoesnotenablethe
　　countrytocontaineventuallyalargercirculatingcapital，than
　　itotherwisecouldpossessandemploywithinitsownlimits;for
　　thereishardlyanycreationoffixedcapitalwhich，whenit
　　provessuccessful，doesnotcheapenthearticlesonwhichwages
　　arehabituallyexpended。Allcapitalsunkinthepermanent
　　improvementofland，lessensthecostoffoodandmaterials;
　　almostallimprovementsinmachinerycheapenthelabourer’s
　　clothingorlodging，orthetoolswithwhichthesearemade;
　　improvementsinlocomotion，suchasrailways，cheapentothe
　　consumerallthingswhicharebroughtfromadistance。Allthese
　　improvementsmakethelabourersbetteroffwiththesamemoney
　　wages，betteroffiftheydonotincreasetheirrateof
　　multiplication。Butiftheydo，andwagesconsequentlyfall，at
　　leastprofitsrise，and，whileaccumulationreceivesanimmediate
　　stimulus，roomismadeforagreateramountofcapitalbeforea
　　sufficientmotivearisesforsendingitabroad。Eventhe
　　improvementswhichdonotcheapenthethingsconsumedbythe
　　labourer，andwhich，therefore，donotraiseprofitsnorretain
　　capitalinthecountry，nevertheless，aswehaveseen，by
　　loweringtheminimumofprofitforwhichpeoplewillultimately
　　consenttosave，leaveanamplermarginthanpreviouslyfor
　　eventualaccumulation，beforearrivingatthestationarystate。
　　Wemayconclude，then，thatimprovementsinproduction，and
　　emigrationofcapitaltothemorefertilesoilsandunworked
　　minesoftheuninhabitedorthinlypeopledpartsoftheglobe，do
　　not，asappearstoasuperficialview，diminishthegrossproduce
　　andthedemandforlabourathome;but，onthecontrary，arewhat
　　wehavechieflytodependonforincreasingboth，andareeven
　　thenecessaryconditionsofanygreatorprolongedaugmentation
　　ofeither。Norisitanyexaggerationtosay，thatwithin
　　certain，andnotverynarrow，limits，themorecapitalacountry
　　likeEnglandexpendsinthesetwoways，themoreshewillhave
　　left。
　　NOTES:
　　1。Itishardlyneedfultopointouthowfullytheremarksinthe
　　texthavebeenverifiedbysubsequentfacts。Thecapitalofthe
　　country，farfromhavingbeeninanydegreeimpairedbythelarge
　　amountsunkinrailwayconstruction，wassoonagainoverflowing。
　　ThePrinciplesofPoliticalEconomy
　　byJohnStuartMill
　　Book4
　　Chapter6
　　OftheStationaryState
　　1。Theprecedingchapterscomprisethegeneraltheoryofthe
　　economicalprogressofsociety，inthesenseinwhichthoseterms
　　arecommonlyunderstood;theprogressofcapital，ofpopulation，
　　andoftheproductivearts。Butincontemplatinganyprogressive
　　movement，notinitsnatureunlimited，themindisnotsatisfied
　　withmerelytracingthelawsofthemovement;itcannotbutask
　　thefurtherquestion，towhatgoal？Towardswhatultimatepoint
　　issocietytendingbyitsindustrialprogress？Whentheprogress
　　ceases，inwhatconditionarewetoexpectthatitwillleave
　　mankind？
　　Itmustalwayshavebeenseen，moreorlessdistinctly，by
　　politicaleconomists，thattheincreaseofwealthisnot
　　boundless:thatattheendofwhattheytermtheprogressive
　　stateliesthestationarystate，thatallprogressinwealthis
　　butapostponementofthis，andthateachstepinadvanceisan
　　approachtoit。Wehavenowbeenledtorecognizethatthis
　　ultimategoalisatalltimesnearenoughtobefullyinview;
　　thatwearealwaysonthevergeofit，andthatifwehavenot
　　reacheditlongago，itisbecausethegoalitselffliesbefore
　　us。Therichestandmostprosperouscountrieswouldverysoon
　　attainthestationarystate，ifnofurtherimprovementsweremade
　　intheproductivearts，andiftherewereasuspensionofthe
　　overflowofcapitalfromthosecountriesintotheuncultivatedor
　　ill—cultivatedregionsoftheearth。
　　Thisimpossibilityofultimatelyavoidingthestationary
　　state——thisirresistiblenecessitythatthestreamofhuman
　　industryshouldfinallyspreaditselfoutintoanapparently
　　stagnantseamusthavebeen，tothepoliticaleconomistsofthe
　　lasttwogenerations，anunpleasinganddiscouragingprospect;
　　forthetoneandtendencyoftheirspeculationsgoescompletely
　　toidentifyallthatiseconomicallydesirablewiththe
　　progressivestate，andwiththatalone。WithMrM’Culloch，for
　　example，prosperitydoesnotmeanalargeproductionandagood
　　distributionofwealth，butarapidincreaseofit;histestof
　　prosperityishighprofits;andasthetendencyofthatvery
　　increaseofwealth，whichhecallsprosperity，istowardslow
　　profits，economicalprogress，accordingtohim，musttendtothe
　　extinctionofprosperity。AdamSmithalwaysassumesthatthe
　　conditionofthemassofthepeople，thoughitmaynotbe
　　positivelydistressed，mustbepinchedandstintedina
　　stationaryconditionofwealth，andcanonlybesatisfactoryina
　　progressivestate。Thedoctrinethat，tohoweverdistantatime
　　incessantstrugglingmayputoffourdoom，theprogressof
　　societymust’endinshallowsandinmiseries’，farfrombeing，
　　asmanypeoplestillbelieve，awickedinventionofMrMalthus，
　　waseitherexpresslyortacitlyaffirmedbyhismost
　　distinguishedpredecessors，andcanonlybesuccessfullycombated
　　onhisprinciples。Beforeattentionhadbeendirectedtothe
　　principleofpopulationastheactiveforceindeterminingthe
　　remunerationoflabour，theincreaseofmankindwasvirtually
　　treatedasaconstantquantity;itwas，atallevents，assumed
　　thatinthenaturalandnormalstateofhumanaffairspopulation
　　mustconstantlyincrease，fromwhichitfollowedthataconstant
　　increaseofthemeansofsupportwasessentialtothephysical
　　comfortofthemassofmankind。ThepublicationofMrMalthus’
　　Essayistheerafromwhichbetterviewsofthissubjectmustbe
　　dated;andnotwithstandingtheacknowledgederrorsofhisfirst
　　edition，fewwritershavedonemorethanhimself，inthe
　　subsequenteditions，topromotethesejusterandmorehopeful
　　anticipations。
　　Eveninaprogressivestateofcapital，inoldcountries，a
　　conscientiousorprudentialrestraintonpopulationis
　　indispensable，topreventtheincreaseofnumbersfrom
　　outstrippingtheincreaseofcapital，andtheconditionofthe
　　classeswhoareatthebottomofsocietyfrombeingdeteriorated。
　　Wherethereisnot，inthepeople，orinsomeverylarge
　　proportionofthem，aresoluteresistancetothisdeterioration—
　　adeterminationtopreserveanestablishedstandardofcomfort—
　　theconditionofthepoorestclasssinks，eveninaprogressive
　　state，tothelowestpointwhichtheywillconsenttoendure。The
　　samedeterminationwouldbeequallyeffectualtokeepuptheir
　　conditioninthestationarystate，andwouldbequiteaslikely
　　toexist。Indeed，evennow，thecountriesinwhichthegreatest
　　prudenceismanifestedintheregulatingofpopulation，areoften
　　thoseinwhichcapitalincreasesleastrapidly。Wherethereisan
　　indefiniteprospectofemploymentforincreasednumbers，thereis
　　apttoappearlessnecessityforprudentialrestraint。Ifitwere
　　evidentthatanewhandcouldnotobtainemploymentbutby
　　displacing，orsucceedingto，onealreadyemployed，thecombined
　　influencesofprudenceandpublicopinionmightinsomemeasure
　　bereliedonforrestrictingthecominggenerationwithinthe
　　numbersnecessaryforreplacingthepresent。
　　2。Icannot，therefore，regardthestationarystateof
　　capitalandwealthwiththeunaffectedaversionsogenerally
　　manifestedtowardsitbypoliticaleconomistsoftheoldschool。
　　Iaminclinedtobelievethatitwouldbe，onthewhole，avery
　　considerableimprovementonourpresentcondition。IconfessIam
　　notcharmedwiththeidealoflifeheldoutbythosewhothink
　　thatthenormalstateofhumanbeingsisthatofstrugglingto
　　geton;thatthetrampling，crushing，elbowing，andtreadingon
　　eachother’sheels，whichformtheexistingtypeofsociallife，
　　arethemostdesirablelotofhumankind，oranythingbutthe
　　disagreeablesymptomsofoneofthephasesofindustrial
　　progress。Itmaybeanecessarystageintheprogressof
　　civilization，andthoseEuropeannationswhichhavehithertobeen
　　sofortunateastobepreservedfromit，mayhaveityetto
　　undergo。Itisanincidentofgrowth，notamarkofdecline，for
　　itisnotnecessarilydestructiveofthehigheraspirationsand
　　theheroicvirtues;asAmerica，inhergreatcivilwar，has
　　provedtotheworld，bothbyherconductasapeopleandby
　　numeroussplendidindividualexamples，andasEngland，itisto
　　behoped，wouldalsoprove，onanequallytryingandexciting
　　occasion。Butitisnotakindofsocialperfectionwhich
　　philanthropiststocomewillfeelanyveryeagerdesiretoassist
　　inrealizing。Mostfitting，indeed，isit，thatwhilerichesare
　　power，andtogrowasrichaspossibletheuniversalobjectof
　　ambition，thepathtoitsattainmentshouldbeopentoall，
　　withoutfavourorpartiality。Butthebeststateforhumannature
　　isthatinwhich，whilenooneispoor，noonedesirestobe
　　richer，norhasanyreasontofearbeingthrustback，bythe
　　effortsofotherstopushthemselvesforward。
　　Thattheenergiesofmankindshouldbekeptinemploymentby
　　thestruggleforriches，astheywereformerlybythestruggleof
　　war，untilthebettermindssucceedineducatingtheothersinto
　　betterthings，isundoubtedlymoredesirablethanthatthey
　　shouldrustandstagnate。Whilemindsarecoarsetheyrequire
　　coarsestimuli，andletthemhavethem。Inthemeantime，those
　　whodonotacceptthepresentveryearlystageofhuman
　　improvementasitsultimatetype，maybeexcusedforbeing
　　comparativelyindifferenttothekindofeconomicalprogress
　　whichexcitesthecongratulationsofordinarypoliticians;the
　　mereincreaseofproductionandaccumulation。Forthesafetyof
　　nationalindependenceitisessentialthatacountryshouldnot
　　fallmuchbehinditsneighboursinthesethings。Butin
　　themselvestheyareoflittleimportance，solongaseitherthe
　　increaseofpopulationoranythingelsepreventsthemassofthe
　　peoplefromreapinganypartofthebenefitofthem。Iknownot
　　whyitshouldbematterofcongratulationthatpersonswhoare
　　alreadyricherthananyoneneedstobe，shouldhavedoubled
　　theirmeansofconsumingthingswhichgivelittleornopleasure
　　exceptasrepresentativeofwealth;orthatnumbersof
　　individualsshouldpassover，everyyear，fromthemiddleclasses
　　intoaricherclass，orfromtheclassoftheoccupiedrichto
　　thatoftheunoccupied。Itisonlyinthebackwardcountriesof
　　theworldthatincreasedproductionisstillanimportantobject:
　　inthosemostadvanced，whatiseconomicallyneededisabetter
　　distribution，ofwhichoneindispensablemeansisastricter
　　restraintonpopulation。Levellinginstitutions，eitherofajust
　　orofanunjustkind，cannotaloneaccomplishit;theymaylower
　　theheightsofsociety，buttheycannot，ofthemselves，
　　permanentlyraisethedepths。
　　Ontheotherhand，wemaysupposethisbetterdistributionof
　　propertyattained，bythejointeffectoftheprudenceand
　　frugalityofindividuals，andofasystemoflegislation
　　favouringequalityoffortunes，sofarasisconsistentwiththe
　　justclaimoftheindividualtothefruits，whethergreator
　　small，ofhisorherownindustry。Wemaysuppose，forinstance
　　（accordingtothesuggestionthrownoutinaformerchapter），a
　　limitationofthesumwhichanyonepersonmayacquirebygiftor
　　inheritance，totheamountsufficienttoconstituteamoderate
　　independence。Underthistwofoldinfluence，societywouldexhibit
　　theseleadingfeatures:awell—paidandaffluentbodyof
　　labourers;noenormousfortunes，exceptwhatwereearnedand
　　accumulatedduringasinglelifetime;butamuchlargerbodyof
　　personsthanatpresent，notonlyexemptfromthecoarsertoils，
　　butwithsufficientleisure，bothphysicalandmental，from
　　mechanicaldetails，tocultivatefreelythegracesoflife，and
　　affordexamplesofthemtotheclasseslessfavourably
　　circumstancedfortheirgrowth。Thisconditionofsociety，so
　　greatlypreferabletothepresent，isnotonlyperfectly
　　compatiblewiththestationarystate，but，itwouldseem，more
　　naturallyalliedwiththatstatethanwithanyother。
　　Thereisroomintheworld，nodoubt，andeveninold
　　countries，foragreatincreaseofpopulation，supposingthearts
　　oflifetogoonimproving，andcapitaltoincrease。Butevenif
　　innocuous，IconfessIseeverylittlereasonfordesiringit。
　　Thedensityofpopulationnecessarytoenablemankindtoobtain，
　　inthegreatestdegree，alltheadvantagesbothofco—operation
　　andofsocialintercourse，has，inallthemostpopulous
　　countries，beenattained。Apopulationmaybetoocrowded，though
　　allbeamplysuppliedwithfoodandraiment。Itisnotgoodfor
　　mantobekeptperforceatalltimesinthepresenceofhis
　　species。Aworldfromwhichsolitudeisextirpated，isavery
　　poorideal。Solitude，inthesenseofbeingoftenalone，is
　　essentialtoanydepthofmeditationorofcharacter;and
　　solitudeinthepresenceofnaturalbeautyandgrandeur，isthe
　　cradleofthoughtsandaspirationswhicharenotonlygoodfor
　　theindividual，butwhichsocietycouldilldowithout。Noris
　　theremuchsatis。factionincontemplatingtheworldwithnothing
　　lefttothespontaneousactivityofnature;witheveryroodof
　　landbroughtintocultivation，whichiscapableofgrowingfood
　　forhumanbeings;everyflowerywasteornaturalpastureploughed
　　up，allquadrupedsorbirdswhicharenotdomesticatedforman’s
　　useexterminatedashisrivalsforfood，everyhedgerowor
　　superfluoustreerootedout，andscarcelyaplaceleftwherea
　　wildshruborflowercouldgrowwithoutbeingeradicatedasa
　　weedinthenameofimprovedagriculture。Iftheearthmustlose
　　thatgreatportionofitspleasantnesswhichitowestothings
　　thattheunlimitedincreaseofwealthandpopulationwould
　　extirpatefromit，forthemerepurposeofenablingittosupport
　　alarger，butnotabetterorahappierpopulation，Isincerely
　　hope，forthesakeofposterity，thattheywillbecontenttobe
　　stationary，longbeforenecessitycompelsthemtoit。
　　Itisscarcelynecessarytoremarkthatastationary
　　conditionofcapitalandpopulationimpliesnostationarystate
　　ofhumanimprovement。Therewouldbeasmuchscopeaseverfor
　　allkindsofmentalculture，andmoralandsocialprogress;as
　　muchroomforimprovingtheArtofLiving，andmuchmore
　　likelihoodofitsbeingimproved，whenmindsceasedtobe
　　engrossedbytheartofgettingon。Eventheindustrialarts
　　mightbeasearnestlyandassuccessfullycultivated，withthis
　　soledifference，thatinsteadofservingnopurposebutthe
　　increaseofwealth，industrialimprovementswouldproducetheir
　　legitimateeffect，thatofabridginglabour。Hithertoitis
　　questionableifallthemechanicalinventionsyetmadehave
　　lightenedtheday’stoilofanyhumanbeing。Theyhaveenableda
　　greaterpopulationtolivethesamelifeofdrudgeryand
　　imprisonment，andanin。creasednumberofmanufacturersand
　　otherstomakefortunes。Theyhaveincreasedthecomfortsofthe
　　middleclasses。Buttheyhavenotyetbeguntoeffectthosegreat
　　changesinhumandestiny，whichitisintheirnatureandin
　　theirfuturitytoaccomplish。Onlywhen，inadditiontojust
　　institutions，theincreaseofmankindshallbeunderthe
　　deliberateguidanceofjudiciousforesight，cantheconquests
　　madefromthepowersofnaturebytheintellectandenergyof
　　scientificdiscoverers，becomethecommonpropertyofthe
　　species，andthemeansofimprovingandelevatingtheuniversal
　　lot。
　　ThePrinciplesofPoliticalEconomybyJohnStuartMillBook4
　　Chapter7
　　OntheProbableFuturityoftheLabouringClasses1。Theobservationsintheprecedingchapterhadfortheirprincipalobjecttodeprecateafalseidealofhumansociety。
　　Theirapplicabilitytothepracticalpurposesofpresenttimes，consistsinmoderatingtheinordinateimportanceattachedtothemereincreaseofproduction，andfixingattentionuponimproveddistribution，andalargeremunerationoflabour，asthetwodesiderata。Whethertheaggregateproduceincreasesabsolutelyornot，isathinginwhich，afteracertainamounthasbeenobtained，neitherthelegislatornorthephilanthropistneedfeelanystronginterest:but，thatitshouldincreaserelativelytothenumberofthosewhoshareinit，isoftheutmostpossibleimportance;andthis，（whetherthewealthofmankindbestationary，orincreasingatthemostrapidrateeverknowninanoldcountry），mustdependontheopinionsandhabitsofthemostnumerousclass，theclassofmanuallabourers。
　　WhenIspeak，eitherinthisplaceorelsewhere，of’thelabouringclasses’，oroflabourersasa’class’，Iusethosephrasesincompliancewithcustom，andasdescriptiveofanexisting，butbynomeansanecessaryorpermanent，stateofsocialrelations。Idonotrecognizeaseitherjustorsalutary，astateofsocietyinwhichthereisany’class’whichisnotlabouring;anyhumanbeings，exemptfrombearingtheirshareofthenecessarylaboursofhumanlife，exceptthoseunabletolabour，orwhohavefairlyearnedrestbyprevioustoil。Solong，however，asthegreatsocialevilexistsofanon—labouringclass，labourersalsoconstituteaclass，andmaybespokenof，thoughonlyprovisionally，inthatcharacter。
　　Consideredinitsmoralandsocialaspect，thestateofthelabouringpeoplehaslatterlybeenasubjectofmuchmorespeculationanddiscussionthanformerly;andtheopinionthatitisnotnowwhatitoughttobe，hasbecomeverygeneral。Thesuggestionswhichhavebeenpromulgated，andthecontroversieswhichhavebeenexcited，ondetachedpointsratherthanonthefoundationsofthesubject，haveputinevidencetheexistenceoftwoconflictingtheories，respectingthesocialpositiondesirableformanuallabourers。Theonemaybecalledthetheoryofdependenceandprotection，theotherthatofself—dependence。
　　Accordingtotheformertheory，thelotofthepoor，inallthingswhichaffectthemcollectively，shouldberegulatedforthem，notbythem。Theyshouldnotberequiredorencouragedtothinkforthemselves，orgivetotheirownreflectionorforecastaninfluentialvoiceinthedeterminationoftheirdestiny。Itissupposedtobethedutyofthehigherclassestothinkforthem，andtotaketheresponsibilityoftheirlot，asthecommanderandofficersofanarmytakethatofthesoldierscomposingit。Thisfunction，itiscontended，thehigherclassesshouldpreparethemselvestoperformconscientiously，andtheirwholedemeanourshouldimpressthepoorwitharelianceonit，inorderthat，whileyieldingpassiveandactiveobediencetotherulesprescribedforthem，theymayresignthemselvesinallotherrespectstoatrustfulinsouciance，andreposeundertheshadowoftheirprotectors。Therelationbetweenrichandpoor，accordingtothistheory（atheoryalsoappliedtotherelationbetweenmenandwomen）shouldbeonlypartlyauthoritative;itshouldbeamiable，moral，andsentimental:affectionatetutelageontheoneside，respectfulandgratefuldeferenceontheother。
　　Therichshouldbeinlocoparentistothepoor，guidingandrestrainingthemlikechildren。Ofspontaneousactionontheirpartthereshouldbenoneed。Theyshouldbecalledonfornothingbuttodotheirday’swork，andtobemoralandreligious。Theirmoralityandreligionshouldbeprovidedforthembytheirsuperiors，whoshouldseethemproperlytaughtit，andshoulddoallthatisnecessarytoensuretheirbeing，inreturnforlabourandattachment，properlyfed，clothed，housed，spirituallyedified，andinnocentlyamused。
　　Thisistheidealofthefuture，inthemindsofthosewhosedissatisfactionwiththepresentassumestheformofaffectionandregrettowardsthepast。Likeotherideals，itexercisesanunconsciousinfluenceontheopinionsandsentimentsofnumberswhoneverconsciouslyguidethemselvesbyanyideal。Ithasalsothisincommonwithotherideals，thatithasneverbeenhistoricallyrealized。Itmakesitsappealtoourimaginativesympathiesinthecharacterofarestorationofthegoodtimesofourforefathers。Butnotimescanbepointedoutinwhichthehigherclassesofthisoranyothercountryperformedapartevendistantlyresemblingtheoneassignedtotheminthistheory。Itisanidealization，groundedontheconductandcharacterofhereandthereanindividual。Allprivilegedandpowerfulclasses，assuch，haveusedtheirpowerintheinterestoftheirownselfishness，andhaveindulgedtheirself。importanceindespising，andnotinlovinglycaringfor，thosewhowere，intheirestimation，degradedbybeingunderthenecessityofworkingfortheirbenefit。Idonotaffirmthatwhathasalwaysbeenmustalwaysbe，orthathumanimprovementhasnotendencytocorrecttheintenselyselfishfillingsengenderedbypower;butthoughtheevilmaybelessened，itcannotbeeradicated，untilthepoweritselfiswithdrawn。This，atleast，seemstomeundeniable，thatlongbeforethesuperiorclassescouldbesufficientlyimprovedtogoverninthetutelarymannersupposed，theinferiorclasseswouldbetoomuchimprovedtobesogoverned。
　　Iamquitesensibleofallthatisseductiveinthepictureofsocietywhichthistheorypresents。Thoughthefactsofithavenoprototypeinthepast，thefeelingshave。Inthemliesallthatthereisofrealityintheconception。Astheideaisessentiallyrepulsiveofasocietyonlyheldtogetherbytherelationsandfeelingsarisingoutofpecuniaryinterests，sothereissomethingnaturallyattractiveinaformofsocietyaboundinginstrongpersonalattachmentsanddisinterestedself。devotion。Ofsuchfeelingsitmustbeadmittedthattherelationofprotectorandprotectedhashithertobeentherichestsource。Thestrongestattachmentsofhumanbeingsingeneral，aretowardsthethingsorthepersonsthatstandbetweenthemandsomedreadedevil。Hence，inanageoflawlessviolenceandinsecurity，andgeneralhardnessandroughnessofmanners，inwhichlifeisbesetwithdangersandsufferingsateverystep，tothosewhohaveneitheracommandingpositionoftheirown，noraclaimontheprotectionofsomeonewhohas——agenerousgivingofprotection，andagratefulreceivingofit，arethestrongesttieswhichconnecthumanbeings;thefeelingsarisingfromthatrelationaretheirwarmestfeelings;alltheenthusiasmandtendernessofthemostsensitivenaturesgatherroundit;loyaltyontheonepartandchivalryontheotherareprinciplesexaltedintopassions。Idonotdesiretodepreciatethesequalities。Theerrorliesinnotperceiving，thatthesevirtuesandsentiments，liketheclanshipandthehospitalityofthewanderingArab，belongemphaticallytoarudeandimperfectstateofthesocialunion;andthatthefeelingsbetweenprotectorandprotected，whetherbetweenkingsandsubjects，richandpoor，ormenandwomen，cannolongerhavethisbeautifulandendearingcharacter，wheretherearenolongeranyseriousdangersfromwhichtoprotect。Whatisthereinthepresentstateofsocietytomakeitnaturalthathumanbeings，ofordinarystrengthandcourage，shouldglowwiththewarmestgratitudeanddevotioninreturnforprotection？Thelawsprotectthem，whereverthelawsdonotcriminallyfailintheirduty。Tobeunderthepowerofsomeone，insteadofbeingasformerlythesoleconditionofsafety，isnow，speakinggenerally，theonlysituationwhichexposestogrievouswrong。Theso—calledprotectorsarenowtheonlypersonsagainstwhom，inanyordinarycircumstances，protectionisneeded。Thebrutalityandtyrannywithwhicheverypolicereportisfilled，arethoseofhusbandstowives，ofparentstochildren。Thatthelawdoesnotpreventtheseatrocities，thatitisonlynowmakingafirsttimidattempttorepressandpunishthem，isnomatterofnecessity，butthedeepdisgraceofthosebywhomthelawsaremadeandadministered。Nomanorwomanwhoeitherpossessesorisabletoearnanindependentlivelihood，requiresanyotherprotectionthanthatwhichthelawcouldandoughttogive。Thisbeingthecase，itarguesgreatignoranceofhumannaturetocontinuetakingforgrantedthatrelationsfoundedonprotectionmustalwayssubsist，andnottoseethattheassumptionofthepartofprotector，andofthepowerwhichbelongstoit，withoutanyofthenecessitieswhichjustifyit，mustengenderfeelingsoppositetoloyalty。
　　Oftheworkingmen，atleastinthemoreadvancedcountriesofEurope，itmaybepronouncedcertain，thatthepatriarchalorpaternalsystemofgovernmentisonetowhichtheywillnotagainbesubject。Thatquestionwasdecided，whentheyweretaughttoread，andallowedaccesstonewspapersandpoliticaltracts;whendissentingpreachersweresufferedtogoamongthem，andappealtotheirfacultiesandfeelingsinoppositiontothecreedsprofessedandcountenancedbytheirsuperiors;whentheywerebroughttogetherinnumbers，toworksociallyunderthesameroof;whenrailwaysenabledthemtoshiftfromplacetoplace，andchangetheirpatronsandemployersaseasilyastheircoats;
　　whentheywereencouragedtoseekashareinthegovernment，bymeansoftheelectoralfranchise。Theworkingclasseshavetakentheirinterestsintotheirownhands，andareperpetuallyshowingthattheythinktheinterestsoftheiremployersnotidenticalwiththeirown，butoppositetothem。Someamongthehigherclassesflatterthemselvesthatthesetendenciesmaybecounteractedbymoralandreligiouseducation:buttheyhaveletthetimegobyforgivinganeducationwhichcanservetheirpurpose。TheprinciplesoftheReformationhavereachedaslowdowninsocietyasreadingandwriting，andthepoorwillnotmuchlongeracceptmoralsandreligionofotherpeople’sprescribing。Ispeakmoreparticularlyofthiscountry，especiallythetownpopulation，andthedistrictsofthemostscientificagricultureorthehighestwages，ScotlandandthenorthofEngland。Amongthemoreinertandlessmodernizedagriculturalpopulationofthesoutherncounties，itmightbepossibleforthegentrytoretain，forsometimelonger，somethingoftheancientdeferenceandsubmissionofthepoor，bybribingthemwithhighwagesandconstantemployment;byinsuringthemsupport，andneverrequiringthemtodoanythingwhichtheydonotlike。Butthesearetwoconditionswhichneverhavebeencombined，andnevercanbe，forlongtogether。Aguaranteeofsubsistencecanonlybepracticallykeptup，whenworkisenforcedandsuperfluousmultiplicationrestrainedbyatleastamoralcompulsion。Itisthen，thatthewould—bereviversofoldtimeswhichtheydonotunderstand，wouldfeelpracticallyinhowhopelessatasktheywereengaged。Thewholefabricofpatriarchalorseignorialinfluence，attemptedtoberaisedonthefoundationofcaressingthepoor，wouldbeshatteredagainstthenecessityofenforcingastringentPoor—law。
　　2。Itisonafarotherbasisthatthewell—beingandwell—doingofthelabouringpeoplemusthenceforthrest。Thepoorhavecomeoutofleading。strings，andcannotanylongerbegovernedortreatedlikechildren。Totheirownqualitiesmustnowbecommendedthecareoftheirdestiny。Modernnationswillhavetolearnthelesson，thatthewell—beingofapeoplemustexistbymeansofthejusticeandself—government，theandoftheindividualcitizens。Thetheoryofdependenceattemptstodispensewiththenecessityofthesequalitiesinthedependentclasses。Butnow，wheneveninpositiontheyarebecominglessandlessdependent，andtheirmindslessandlessacquiescentinthedegreeofdependencewhichremains，thevirtuesofindependencearethosewhichtheystandinneedof。Whateveradvice，exhortationorguidanceisheldouttothelabouringclasses，musthenceforthbetenderedtothemasequalsandacceptedbythemwiththeireyesopen。Theprospectofthefuturedependsonthedegreeinwhichtheycanbemaderationalbeings。
　　Thereisnoreasontobelievethatprospectotherthanhopeful。Theprogressindeedhashithertobeen，andstillis，slow。Butthereisaspontaneouseducationgoingoninthemindsofthemultitude，whichmaybegreatlyacceleratedandimprovedbyartificialaids。Theinstructionobtainedfromnewspapersandpoliticaltractsmaynotbethemostsolidkindofinstruction，butitisanimmenseimprovementuponnoneatall。Whatitdoesforapeople，hasbeenadmirablyexemplifiedduringthecottoncrisis，inthecaseoftheLancashirespinnersandweavers，whohaveactedwiththeconsistentgoodsenseandforbearancesojustlyapplauded，simplybecause，beingreadersofnewspapers，theyunderstoodthecausesofthecalamitywhichhadbefallenthem，andknewthatitwasinnowayimputableeithertotheiremployersortotheGovernment。Itisnotcertainthattheirconductwouldhavebeenasrationalandexemplary，ifthedistresshadprecededthesalutarymeasureoffiscalemancipationwhichgaveexistencetothepennypress。Theinstitutionsforlecturesanddiscussion，thecollectivedeliberationsonquestionsofcommoninterest，thetradesunions，thepoliticalagitation，allservetoawakenpublicspirit，todiffusevarietyofideasamongthemass，andtoexcitethoughtandreflectioninthemoreintelligent。Althoughthetooearlyattainmentofpoliticalfranchisesbytheleasteducatedclassmightretard，insteadofpromoting，theirimprovement，therecanbelittledoubtthatithasbeengreatlystiPulatedbytheattempttoacquirethem。Inthemeantime，theworkingclassesarenowpartofthepublic;inalldiscussionsonmattersofgeneralinterestthey，oraportionofthem，arenowpartakers;allwhousethepressasaninstrumentmay，ifitsohappens，havethemforanaudience;theavenuesofinstructionthroughwhichthemiddleclassesacquiresuchideasastheyhave，areaccessibleto，atleast，theoperativesinthetowns。Withtheseresources，itcannotbedoubtedthattheywillincreaseinintelligence，evenbytheirownunaidedefforts;whilethereisreasontohopethatgreatimprovementsbothinthequalityandquantityofschooleducationwillbeeffectedbytheexertionseitherofgovernmentorofindividuals，andthattheprogressofthemassofthepeopleinmentalcultivation，andinthevirtueswhicharedependentonit，willtakeplacemorerapidly，andwithfewerintermittencesandaberrations，thaniflefttoitself。
　　Fromthisincreaseofintelligence，severaleffectsmaybeconfidentlyanticipated。First:thattheywillbecomeevenlesswillingthanatpresenttobeledandgoverned，anddirectedintothewaytheyshouldgo，bythemereauthorityandprestigeofsuperiors。Iftheyhavenotnow，stilllesswilltheyhavehereafter，anydeferentialawe，orreligiousprincipleofobedience，holdingtheminmentalsubjectiontoaclassabovethem。Thetheoryofdependenceandprotectionwillbemoreandmoreintolerabletothem，andtheywillrequirethattheirconductandconditionshallbeessentiallyself—governed。Itis，atthesametime，quitepossiblethattheymaydemand，inmanycases，theinterventionofthelegislatureintheiraffairs，andtheregulationbylawofvariousthingswhichconcernthem，oftenunderverymistakenideasandsuggestions，towhichtheywilldemandthateffectshouldbegiven，andnotruleslaiddownforthembyotherpeople。Itisquiteconsistentwiththis，thattheyshouldfeelrespectforsuperiorityofintellectandknowledge，anddefermuchtotheopinions，onanysubject，ofthosewhomtheythinkwellacquaintedwithit。Suchdeferenceisdeeplygroundedinhumannature;buttheywilljudgeforthemselvesofthepersonswhoareandarenotentitledtoit。
　　3。Itappearstomeimpossiblebutthattheincreaseofintelligence，ofeducation，andoftheloveofindependenceamongtheworkingclasses，mustbeattendedwithacorrespondinggrowthofthegoodsensewhichmanifestsitselfinprovidenthabitsofconduct，andthatpopulation，therefore，willbearagraduallydiminishingratiotocapitalandemployment。Thismostdesirableresultwouldbemuchacceleratedbyanotherchange，whichliesinthedirectlineofthebesttendenciesofthetime;theopeningofindustrialoccupationsfreelytobothsexes。Thesamereasonswhichmakeitnolongernecessarythatthepoorshoulddependontherich，makeitequallyunnecessarythatwomenshoulddependonmen;andtheleastwhichjusticerequiresisthatlawandcustomshouldnotenforcedependence（whenthecorrelativeprotectionhasbecomesuperfluous）byordainingthatawoman，whodoesnothappentohaveaprovisionbyinheritance，shallhavescarcelyanymeansopentoherofgainingalivelihood，exceptasawifeandmother。Letwomenwhopreferthatoccupation，adoptit;butthatthereshouldbenooption，noothercareerpossibleforthegreatmajorityofwomen，exceptinthehumblerdepartmentsoflife，isaflagrantsocialinjustice。Theideasandinstitutionsbywhichtheaccidentofsexismadethegroundworkofaninequalityoflegalrights，andaforceddissimilarityofsocialfunctions，musterelongberecognizedasthegreatesthindrancetomoral，social，andevenintellectualimprovement。OnthepresentoccasionIshallonlyindicate，amongtheprobableconsequencesoftheindustrialandsocialindependenceofwomen，agreatdiminutionoftheevilofover—population。Itisbydevotingone—halfofthehumanspeciestothatexclusivefunction，bymakingitfilltheentirelifeofonesex，andinterweaveitselfwithalmostalltheobjectsoftheother，thattheanimalinstinctinquestionisnursedintothedisproportionatepreponderancewhichithashithertoexercisedinhumanlife。
　　4。Thepoliticalconsequencesoftheincreasingpowerandimportanceoftheoperativeclasses，andofthegrowingascendancyofnumbers，which，eveninEnglandandunderthepresentinstitutions，israpidlygivingtothewillofthemajorityatleastanegativevoiceintheactsofgovernment，aretoowideasubjecttobediscussedinthisplace。But，confiningourselvestoeconomicalconsiderations，andnotwithstandingtheeffectwhichimprovedintelligenceintheworkingclasses，togetherwithjustlaws，mayhaveinalteringthedistributionoftheproducetotheiradvantage，Icannotthinkthattheywillbepermanentlycontentedwiththeconditionoflabouringforwagesastheirultimatestate。Theymaybewillingtopassthroughtheclassofservantsintheirwaytothatofemployers;butnottoremaininitalltheirlives。Tobeginashiredlabourers，thenafterafewyearstoworkontheirownaccount，andfinallyemployothers，isthenormalconditionoflabourersinanewcountry，rapidlyincreasinginwealthandpopulation，likeAmericaorAustralia。Butinanoldandfullypeopledcountry，thosewhobeginlifeaslabourersforhire，asageneralrule，continuesuchtotheend，unlesstheysinkintothestilllowergradeofrecipientsofpubliccharity。Inthepresentstageofhumanprogress，whenideasofequalityaredailyspreadingmorewidelyamongthepoorerclasses，andcannolongerbecheckedbyanythingshortoftheentiresuppressionofprinteddiscussionandevenoffreedomofspeech，itisnottobeexpectedthatthedivisionofthehumanraceintotwohereditaryclasses，employersandemployed，canbepermanentlymaintained。Therelationisnearlyasunsatisfactorytothepayerofwagesastothereceiver。Iftherichregardthepooras，byakindofnaturallaw，theirservantsanddependents，therichintheirturnareregardedasamerepreyandpastureforthepoor;thesubjectofdemandsandexpectationswhollyindefinite，increasinginextentwitheveryconcessionmadetothem。Thetotalabsenceofregardforjusticeorfairnessintherelationsbetweenthetwo，isasmarkedonthesideoftheemployedasonthatoftheemployers。
　　Welookinvainamongtheworkingclassesingeneralforthejustpridewhichwillchoosetogivegoodworkforgoodwages;forthemostpart，theirsoleendeavouristoreceiveasmuch，andreturnaslittleintheshapeofservice，aspossible。Itwillsoonerorlaterbecomeinsupportabletotheemployingclasses，toliveincloseandhourlycontactwithpersonswhoseinterestsandfeelingsareinhostilitytothem。Capitalistsarealmostasmuchinterestedaslabourersinplacingtheoperationsofindustryonsuchafooting，thatthosewholabourforthemmayfeelthesameinterestinthework，whichisfeltbythosewholabourontheirownaccount。
　　Theopinionexpressedinaformerpartofthistreatiserespect。ingsmalllandedpropertiesandpeasantproprietors，mayhavemadethereaderanticipatethatawidediffusionofpropertyinlandistheresourceonwhichIrelyforexemptingatleasttheagriculturallabourersfromexclusivedependenceonlabourforhire。Such，however，isnotmyopinion。Iindeeddeemthatformofagriculturaleconomytobemostgroundlesslycrieddown，andtobegreatlypreferable，initsaggregateeffectsonhumanhappiness，tohiredlabourinanyforminwhichitexistsatpresent;becausetheprudentialchecktopopulationactsmoredirectly，andisshownbyexperiencetobemoreefficacious;andbecause，inpointofsecurity，ofindependence，ofexerciseofanyotherthantheanimalfaculties，thestateofapeasantproprietorisfarsuperiortothatofanagriculturallabourerinthisoranyotheroldcountry。Wheretheformersystemalreadyexists，andworksonthewholesatisfactorily，Ishouldregret，inthepresentstateofhumanintelligence，toseeitabolishedinordertomakewayfortheother，underapedanticnotionofagriculturalimprovementasathingnecessarilythesameineverydiversityofcircumstances。Inabackwardstateofindustrialimprovement，asinIreland，Ishouldurgeitsintroduction，inpreferencetoanexclusivesystemofhiredlabour;asamorepowerfulinstrumentforraisingapopulationfromsemi—savagelistlessnessandrecklessness，toperseveringindustryandprudentcalculation。