資本論 CHAPTER 6: THE BUYING AND SELLING OF LABOUR-POWER

The

change

of

value

that

occurs

in

the

case

of

money

intended

to

be

converted

into

capital,

cannot

take

place

in

the

money

itself,

since

in

its

function

of

means

of

purchase

and

of

payment,

it

does

no

more

than

realise

the

price

of

the

commodity

it

buys

or

pays

for;

and,

as

hard

cash,

it

is

value

petrified,never

varying.1Just

as

little

can

it

originate

in

the

second

act

of

circulation,

the

re-sale

of

the

commodity,which

does

no

more

than

transform

the

article

from

its

bodily

form

back

again

into

its

money-form.

The

change

must,

therefore,

take

place

in

the

commodity

bought

by

the

first

act,

M-C,

but

not

in

its

value,

for

equivalents

are

exchanged,

and

the

commodity

is

paid

for

at

its

full

value.

We

are,

therefore,

forced

to

the

conclusion

that

the

change

originates

in

the

use-value,as

such,

of

the

commodity,

i.e.,

in

its

consumption.

In

order

to

be

able

to

extract

value

from

the

consumption

of

a

commodity,

our

friend,

Moneybags,

must

be

so

lucky

as

to

find,

within

the

sphere

of

circulation,

in

the

market,

a

commodity,

whose

use-value

possesses

the

peculiar

property

of

being

a

source

of

value,

whose

actual

consumption,

therefore,

is

itself

an

embodiment

of

labour,

and,

consequently,

a

creation

of

value.

The

possessor

of

money

does

find

on

the

market

such

a

special

commodity

in

capacity

for

labour

or

labour

power.

By

labour-power

or

capacity

for

labour

is

to

be

understood

the

aggregate

of

those

mental

and

physical

capabilities

existing

in

a

human

being,

which

he

exercises

whenever

he

produces

a

use-value

of

any

description.

But

in

order

that

our

owner

of

money

may

be

able

to

find

labour-power

offered

for

sale

as

a

commodity,various

conditions

must

first

be

fulfilled.

The

exchange

of

commodities

of

itself

implies

no

other

relations

of

dependence

than

those

which

result

from

its

own

nature.

On

this

assumption,

labour-power

can

appear

upon

the

market

as

a

commodity,

only

if,

and

so

far

as,

its

possessor,

the

individual

whose

labour-power

it

is,

offers

it

for

sale,

or

sells

it,

as

a

commodity.

In

order

that

he

may

be

able

to

do

this,

he

must

have

it

at

his

disposal,

must

be

the

untrammelled

owner

of

his

capacity

for

labour,

i.e.,

of

his

person.2He

and

the

owner

of

money

meet

in

the

market,

and

deal

with

each

other

as

on

the

basis

of

equal

rights,

with

this

difference

alone,

that

one

is

buyer,

the

other

seller;both,

therefore,

equal

in

the

eyes

of

the

law.

The

continuance

of

this

relation

demands

that

the

owner

of

the

labour-power

should

sell

it

only

for

a

definite

period,

for

if

he

were

to

sell

it

rump

and

stump,once

for

all,

he

would

be

selling

himself,

converting

himself

from

a

free

man

into

a

slave,

from

an

owner

of

a

commodity

into

a

commodity.

He

must

constantly

look

upon

his

labour-power

as

his

own

property,

his

own

commodity,

and

this

he

can

only

do

by

placing

it

at

the

disposal

of

the

buyer

temporarily,

for

a

definite

period

of

time.

By

this

means

alone

can

he

avoid

renouncing

his

rights

of

ownership

over

it.3

The

second

essential

condition

to

the

owner

of

money

finding

labour-power

in

the

market

as

a

commodity

is

this

–

that

the

labourer

instead

of

being

in

the

position

to

sell

commodities

in

which

his

labour

is

incorporated,

must

be

obliged

to

offer

for

sale

as

a

commodity

that

very

labour-power,

which

exists

only

in

his

living

self.

In

order

that

a

man

may

be

able

to

sell

commodities

other

than

labour-power,

he

must

of

course

have

the

means

of

production,

as

raw

material,

implements,&c.

No

boots

can

be

made

without

leather.

He

requires

also

the

means

of

subsistence.

Nobody

–

not

even\"a

musician

of

the

future\"

–

can

live

upon

future

products,

or

upon

use-values

in

an

unfinished

state;and

ever

since

the

first

moment

of

his

appearance

on

the

world's

stage,

man

always

has

been,

and

must

still

be

a

consumer,

both

before

and

while

he

is

producing.In

a

society

where

all

products

assume

the

form

of

commodities,

these

commodities

must

be

sold

after

they

have

been

produced,

it

is

only

after

their

sale

that

they

can

serve

in

satisfying

the

requirements

of

their

producer.

The

time

necessary

for

their

sale

is

superadded

to

that

necessary

for

their

production.

For

the

conversion

of

his

money

into

capital,therefore,

the

owner

of

money

must

meet

in

the

market

with

the

free

labourer,

free

in

the

double

sense,that

as

a

free

man

he

can

dispose

of

his

labour-power

as

his

own

commodity,

and

that

on

the

other

hand

he

has

no

other

commodity

for

sale,

is

short

of

everything

necessary

for

the

realisation

of

his

labour-power.

The

question

why

this

free

labourer

confronts

him

in

the

market,

has

no

interest

for

the

owner

of

money,

who

regards

the

labour-market

as

a

branch

of

the

general

market

for

commodities.

And

for

the

present

it

interests

us

just

as

little.

We

cling

to

the

fact

theoretically,

as

he

does

practically.

One

thing,however,

is

clear

–

Nature

does

not

produce

on

the

one

side

owners

of

money

or

commodities,

and

on

the

other

men

possessing

nothing

but

their

own

labour-power.

This

relation

has

no

natural

basis,neither

is

its

social

basis

one

that

is

common

to

all

historical

periods.

It

is

clearly

the

result

of

a

past

historical

development,

the

product

of

many

economic

revolutions,

of

the

extinction

of

a

whole

series

of

older

forms

of

social

production.

So,

too,

the

economic

categories,

already

discussed

by

us,

bear

the

stamp

of

history.

Definite

historical

conditions

are

necessary

that

a

product

may

become

a

commodity.

It

must

not

be

produced

as

the

immediate

means

of

subsistence

of

the

producer

himself.

Had

we

gone

further,

and

inquired

under

what

circumstances

all,

or

even

the

majority

of

products

take

the

form

of

commodities,

we

should

have

found

that

this

can

only

happen

with

production

of

a

very

specific

kind,capitalist

production.

Such

an

inquiry,

however,

would

have

been

foreign

to

the

analysis

of

commodities.Production

and

circulation

of

commodities

can

take

place,

although

the

great

mass

of

the

objects

produced

are

intended

for

the

immediate

requirements

of

their

producers,

are

not

turned

into

commodities,

and

consequently

social

production

is

not

yet

by

a

long

way

dominated

in

its

length

and

breadth

by

exchange

value.

The

appearance

of

products

as

commodities

pre

supposes

such

a

development

of

the

social

division

of

labour,

that

the

separation

of

use-value

from

exchange

value,

a

separation

which

first

begins

with

barter,

must

already

have

been

completed.

But

such

a

degree

of

development

is

common

to

many

forms

of

society,which

in

other

respects

present

the

most

varying

historical

features.

On

the

other

hand,

if

we

consider

money,

its

existence

implies

a

definite

stage

in

the

exchange

of

commodities.

The

particular

functions

of

money

which

it

performs,

either

as

the

mere

equivalent

of

commodities,

or

as

means

of

circulation,

or

means

of

payment,

as

hoard

or

as

universal

money,

point,according

to

the

extent

and

relative

preponderance

of

the

one

function

or

the

other,

to

very

different

stages

in

the

process

of

social

production.

Yet

we

know

by

experience

that

a

circulation

of

commodities

relatively

primitive,

suffices

for

the

production

of

all

these

forms.

Otherwise

with

capital.

The

historical

conditions

of

its

existence

are

by

no

means

given

with

the

mere

circulation

of

money

and

commodities.

It

can

spring

into

life,

only

when

the

owner

of

the

means

of

production

and

subsistence

meets

in

the

market

with

the

free

labourer

selling

his

labour-power.

And

this

one

historical

condition

comprises

a

world's

history.Capital,

therefore,

announces

from

its

first

appearance

a

new

epoch

in

the

process

of

social

production.4

We

must

now

examine

more

closely

this

peculiar

commodity,

labour-power.

Like

all

others

it

has

a

value.5How

is

that

value

determined

The

value

of

labour-power

is

determined,

as

in

the

case

of

every

other

commodity,

by

the

labour-time

necessary

for

the

production,

and

consequently

also

the

reproduction,

of

this

special

article.

So

far

as

it

has

value,

it

represents

no

more

than

a

definite

quantity

of

the

average

labour

of

society

incorporated

in

it.Labour-power

exists

only

as

a

capacity,

or

power

of

the

living

individual.

Its

production

consequently

pre-supposes

his

existence.

Given

the

individual,the

production

of

labour-power

consists

in

his

reproduction

of

himself

or

his

maintenance.

For

his

maintenance

he

requires

a

given

quantity

of

the

means

of

subsistence.

Therefore

the

labour-time

requisite

for

the

production

of

labour-power

reduces

itself

to

that

necessary

for

the

production

of

those

means

of

subsistence;

in

other

words,

the

value

of

labour-power

is

the

value

of

the

means

of

subsistence

necessary

for

the

maintenance

of

the

labourer.

Labour-power,however,

becomes

a

reality

only

by

its

exercise;

it

sets

itself

in

action

only

by

working.

But

thereby

a

definite

quantity

of

human

muscle,

nerve,

brain,&c.,

is

wasted,

and

these

require

to

be

restored.

This

increased

expenditure

demands

a

larger

income.6If

the

owner

of

labour-power

works

to-day,

to-morrow

he

must

again

be

able

to

repeat

the

same

process

in

the

same

conditions

as

regards

health

and

strength.His

means

of

subsistence

must

therefore

be

sufficient

to

maintain

him

in

his

normal

state

as

a

labouring

individual.

His

natural

wants,

such

as

food,

clothing,

fuel,

and

housing,

vary

according

to

the

climatic

and

other

physical

conditions

of

his

country.

On

the

other

hand,

the

number

and

extent

of

his

so-called

necessary

wants,

as

also

the

modes

of

satisfying

them,are

themselves

the

product

of

historical

development,and

depend

therefore

to

a

great

extent

on

the

degree

of

civilisation

of

a

country,

more

particularly

on

the

conditions

under

which,

and

consequently

on

the

habits

and

degree

of

comfort

in

which,

the

class

of

free

labourers

has

been

formed.7In

contradistinction

therefore

to

the

case

of

other

commodities,

there

enters

into

the

determination

of

the

value

of

labour

power

a

historical

and

moral

element.

Nevertheless,

in

a

given

country,

at

a

given

period,

the

average

quantity

of

the

means

of

subsistence

necessary

for

the

labourer

is

practically

known.

The

owner

of

labour-power

is

mortal.

If

then

his

appearance

in

the

market

is

to

be

continuous,

and

the

continuous

conversion

of

money

into

capital

assumes

this,

the

seller

of

labour-power

must

perpetuate

himself,

\"in

the

way

that

every

living

individual

perpetuates

himself,

by

procreation.\"8The

labour

power

withdrawn

from

the

market

by

wear

and

tear

and

death,

must

be

continually

replaced

by,

at

the

very

least,

an

equal

amount

of

fresh

labour-power.Hence

the

sum

of

the

means

of

subsistence

necessary

for

the

production

of

labour-power

must

include

the

means

necessary

for

the

labourer's

substitutes,

i.e.,

his

children,

in

order

that

this

race

of

peculiar

commodity

owners

may

perpetuate

its

appearance

in

the

market.9

In

order

to

modify

the

human

organism,

so

that

it

may

acquire

skill

and

handiness

in

a

given

branch

of

industry,

and

become

labour-power

of

a

special

kind,a

special

education

or

training

is

requisite,

and

this,on

its

part,

costs

an

equivalent

in

commodities

of

a

greater

or

less

amount.

This

amount

varies

according

to

the

more

or

less

complicated

character

of

the

labour

power.

The

expenses

of

this

education

(excessively

small

in

the

case

of

ordinary

labour-power),

enter

pro

tanto

into

the

total

value

spent

in

its

production.

The

value

of

labour-power

resolves

itself

into

the

value

of

a

definite

quantity

of

the

means

of

subsistence.

It

therefore

varies

with

the

value

of

these

means

or

with

the

quantity

of

labour

requisite

for

their

production.

Some

of

the

means

of

subsistence,

such

as

food

and

fuel,

are

consumed

daily,

and

a

fresh

supply

must

be

provided

daily.

Others

such

as

clothes

and

furniture

last

for

longer

periods

and

require

to

be

replaced

only

at

longer

intervals.

One

article

must

be

bought

or

paid

for

daily,

another

weekly,

another

quarterly,

and

so

on.

But

in

whatever

way

the

sum

total

of

these

outlays

may

be

spread

over

the

year,

they

must

be

covered

by

the

average

income,

taking

one

day

with

another.If

the

total

of

the

commodities

required

daily

for

the

production

of

labour-power

=

A,

and

those

required

weekly

=

B,

and

those

required

quarterly

=

C,

and

so

on,

the

daily

average

of

these

commodities

=

(365A

52B

4C

&c)

\/

365.

Suppose

that

in

this

mass

of

commodities

requisite

for

the

average

day

there

are

embodied

6

hours

of

social

labour,

then

there

is

incorporated

daily

in

labour-power

half

a

day's

average

social

labour,

in

other

words,

half

a

day's

labour

is

requisite

for

the

daily

production

of

labour

power.

This

quantity

of

labour

forms

the

value

of

a

day's

labour-power

or

the

value

of

the

labour-power

daily

reproduced.

If

half

a

day's

average

social

labour

is

incorporated

in

three

shillings,

then

three

shillings

is

the

price

corresponding

to

the

value

of

a

day's

labour-power.

If

its

owner

therefore

offers

it

for

sale

at

three

shillings

a

day,

its

selling

price

is

equal

to

its

value,

and

according

to

our

supposition,

our

friend

Moneybags,

who

is

intent

upon

converting

his

three

shillings

into

capital,

pays

this

value.

The

minimum

limit

of

the

value

of

labour-power

is

determined

by

the

value

of

the

commodities,

without

the

daily

supply

of

which

the

labourer

cannot

renew

his

vital

energy,

consequently

by

the

value

of

those

means

of

subsistence

that

are

physically

indispensable.If

the

price

of

labour-power

fall

to

this

minimum,

it

falls

below

its

value,

since

under

such

circumstances

it

can

be

maintained

and

developed

only

in

a

crippled

state.

But

the

value

of

every

commodity

is

determined

by

the

labour-time

requisite

to

turn

it

out

so

as

to

be

of

normal

quality.

It

is

a

very

cheap

sort

of

sentimentality

which

declares

this

method

of

determining

the

value

of

labour-power,

a

method

prescribed

by

the

very

nature

of

the

case,

to

be

a

brutal

method,

and

which

wails

with

Rossi

that,

\"To

comprehend

capacity

for

labour

(puissance

de

travail)

at

the

same

time

that

we

make

abstraction

from

the

means

of

subsistence

of

the

labourers

during

the

process

of

production,is

to

comprehend

a

phantom

(être

de

raison).

When

we

speak

of

labour,

or

capacity

for

labour,

we

speak

at

the

same

time

of

the

labourer

and

his

means

of

subsistence,

of

labourer

and

wages.\"10When

we

speak

of

capacity

for

labour,

we

do

not

speak

of

labour,

any

more

than

when

we

speak

of

capacity

for

digestion,we

speak

of

digestion.

The

latter

process

requires

something

more

than

a

good

stomach.

When

we

speak

of

capacity

for

labour,

we

do

not

abstract

from

the

necessary

means

of

subsistence.

On

the

contrary,their

value

is

expressed

in

its

value.

If

his

capacity

for

labour

remains

unsold,

the

labourer

derives

no

benefit

from

it,

but

rather

he

will

feel

it

to

be

a

cruel

nature-imposed

necessity

that

this

capacity

has

cost

for

its

production

a

definite

amount

of

the

means

of

subsistence

and

that

it

will

continue

to

do

so

for

its

reproduction.

He

will

then

agree

with

Sismondi:

\"that

capacity

for

labour

...

is

nothing

unless

it

is

sold.\"11

One

consequence

of

the

peculiar

nature

of

labour

power

as

a

commodity

is,

that

its

use-value

does

not,on

the

conclusion

of

the

contract

between

the

buyer

and

seller,

immediately

pass

into

the

hands

of

the

former.

Its

value,

like

that

of

every

other

commodity,is

already

fixed

before

it

goes

into

circulation,

since

a

definite

quantity

of

social

labour

has

been

spent

upon

it;

but

its

use-value

consists

in

the

subsequent

exercise

of

its

force.

The

alienation

of

labour-power

and

its

actual

appropriation

by

the

buyer,

its

employment

as

a

use-value,

are

separated

by

an

interval

of

time.

But

in

those

cases

in

which

the

formal

alienation

by

sale

of

the

use-value

of

a

commodity,

is

not

simultaneous

with

its

actual

delivery

to

the

buyer,

the

money

of

the

latter

usually

functions

as

means

of

payment.12In

every

country

in

which

the

capitalist

mode

of

production

reigns,

it

is

the

custom

not

to

pay

for

labour-power

before

it

has

been

exercised

for

the

period

fixed

by

the

contract,

as

for

example,

the

end

of

each

week.

In

all

cases,

therefore,

the

use-value

of

the

labour-power

is

advanced

to

the

capitalist:

the

labourer

allows

the

buyer

to

consume

it

before

he

receives

payment

of

the

price;

he

everywhere

gives

credit

to

the

capitalist.That

this

credit

is

no

mere

fiction,

is

shown

not

only

by

the

occasional

loss

of

wages

on

the

bankruptcy

of

the

capitalist,13but

also

by

a

series

of

more

enduring

consequences.14Nevertheless,

whether

money

serves

as

a

means

of

purchase

or

as

a

means

of

payment,

this

makes

no

alteration

in

the

nature

of

the

exchange

of

commodities.

The

price

of

the

labour-power

is

fixed

by

the

contract,

although

it

is

not

realised

till

later,like

the

rent

of

a

house.

The

labour-power

is

sold,although

it

is

only

paid

for

at

a

later

period.

It

will,therefore,

be

useful,

for

a

clear

comprehension

of

the

relation

of

the

parties,

to

assume

provisionally,

that

the

possessor

of

labour-power,

on

the

occasion

of

each

sale,

immediately

receives

the

price

stipulated

to

be

paid

for

it.

We

now

know

how

the

value

paid

by

the

purchaser

to

the

possessor

of

this

peculiar

commodity,

labour

power,

is

determined.

The

use-value

which

the

former

gets

in

exchange,

manifests

itself

only

in

the

actual

utilisation,

in

the

consumption

of

the

labour-power.The

money-owner

buys

everything

necessary

for

this

purpose,

such

as

raw

material,

in

the

market,

and

pays

for

it

at

its

full

value.

The

consumption

of

labour

power

is

at

one

and

the

same

time

the

production

of

commodities

and

of

surplus-value.

The

consumption

of

labour-power

is

completed,

as

in

the

case

of

every

other

commodity,

outside

the

limits

of

the

market

or

of

the

sphere

of

circulation.

Accompanied

by

Mr.Moneybags

and

by

the

possessor

of

labour-power,

we

therefore

take

leave

for

a

time

of

this

noisy

sphere,where

everything

takes

place

on

the

surface

and

in

view

of

all

men,

and

follow

them

both

into

the

hidden

abode

of

production,

on

whose

threshold

there

stares

us

in

the

face

\"No

admittance

except

on

business.\"Here

we

shall

see,

not

only

how

capital

produces,

but

how

capital

is

produced.

We

shall

at

last

force

the

secret

of

profit

making.

This

sphere

that

we

are

deserting,

within

whose

boundaries

the

sale

and

purchase

of

labour-power

goes

on,

is

in

fact

a

very

Eden

of

the

innate

rights

of

man.There

alone

rule

Freedom,

Equality,

Property

and

Bentham.

Freedom,

because

both

buyer

and

seller

of

a

commodity,

say

of

labour-power,

are

constrained

only

by

their

own

free

will.

They

contract

as

free

agents,and

the

agreement

they

come

to,

is

but

the

form

in

which

they

give

legal

expression

to

their

common

will.

Equality,

because

each

enters

into

relation

with

the

other,

as

with

a

simple

owner

of

commodities,

and

they

exchange

equivalent

for

equivalent.

Property,because

each

disposes

only

of

what

is

his

own.

And

Bentham,

because

each

looks

only

to

himself.

The

only

force

that

brings

them

together

and

puts

them

in

relation

with

each

other,

is

the

selfishness,

the

gain

and

the

private

interests

of

each.

Each

looks

to

himself

only,

and

no

one

troubles

himself

about

the

rest,

and

just

because

they

do

so,

do

they

all,

in

accordance

with

the

pre-established

harmony

of

things,

or

under

the

auspices

of

an

all-shrewd

providence,

work

together

to

their

mutual

advantage,

for

the

common

weal

and

in

the

interest

of

all.

On

leaving

this

sphere

of

simple

circulation

or

of

exchange

of

commodities,

which

furnishes

the

\"Free

trader

Vulgaris\"

with

his

views

and

ideas,

and

with

the

standard

by

which

he

judges

a

society

based

on

capital

and

wages,

we

think

we

can

perceive

a

change

in

the

physiognomy

of

our

dramatis

personae.

He,

who

before

was

the

money-owner,

now

strides

in

front

as

capitalist;

the

possessor

of

labour-power

follows

as

his

labourer.

The

one

with

an

air

of

importance,

smirking,intent

on

business;

the

other,

timid

and

holding

back,like

one

who

is

bringing

his

own

hide

to

market

and

has

nothing

to

expect

but

–

a

hiding.

NOTES:

1\"In

the

form

of

money

...

capital

is

productive

of

no

profit.\"(Ricardo:

\"Princ.

of

Pol.

Econ.,\"

p.

267.)

2In

encyclopaedias

of

classical

antiquities

we

find

such

nonsense

as

this

—

that

in

the

ancient

world

capital

was

fully

developed,

\"except

that

the

free

labourer

and

a

system

of

credit

was

wanting.\"

Mommsen

also,

in

his

\"History

of

Rome,\"commits,

in

this

respect,

one

blunder

after

another.

3Hence

legislation

in

various

countries

fixes

a

maximum

for

labour-contracts.

Wherever

free

labour

is

the

rule,

the

laws

regulate

the

mode

of

terminating

this

contract.

In

some

States,particularly

in

Mexico

(before

the

American

Civil

War,

also

in

the

territories

taken

from

Mexico,

and

also,

as

a

matter

of

fact,

in

the

Danubian

provinces

till

the

revolution

effected

by

Kusa),

slavery

is

hidden

under

the

form

of

peonage.

By

means

of

advances,

repayable

in

labour,

which

are

handed

down

from

generation

to

generation,

not

only

the

individual

labourer,

but

his

family,

become,

de

facto,

the

property

of

other

persons

and

their

families.

Juarez

abolished

peonage.

The

so-called

Emperor

Maximilian

re-established

it

by

a

decree,

which,

in

the

House

of

Representatives

at

Washington,

was

aptly

denounced

as

a

decree

for

the

re-introduction

of

slavery

into

Mexico.

\"I

may

make

over

to

another

the

use,

for

a

limited

time,

of

my

particular

bodily

and

mental

aptitudes

and

capabilities;

because

in

consequence

of

this

restriction,

they

are

impressed

with

a

character

of

alienation

with

regard

to

me

as

a

whole.

But

by

the

alienation

of

all

my

labour-time

and

the

whole

of

my

work,I

should

be

converting

the

substance

itself,

in

other

words,

my

general

activity

and

reality,

my

person,

into

the

property

of

another.\"

(Hegel,

\"Philosophie

des

Rechts.\"

Berlin,

1840,

p.104,

§

67.)

4The

capitalist

epoch

is

therefore

characterised

by

this,

that

labour-power

takes

in

the

eyes

of

the

labourer

himself

the

form

of

a

commodity

which

is

his

property;

his

labour

consequently

becomes

wage-labour.

On

the

other

hand,

it

is

only

from

this

moment

that

the

produce

of

labour

universally

becomes

a

commodity.

5\"The

value

or

worth

of

a

man,

is

as

of

all

other

things

his

price

—

that

is

to

say,

so

much

as

would

be

given

for

the

use

of

his

power.\"

(Th.

Hobbes:

\"Leviathan\"

in

Works,

Ed.Molesworth.

Lond.

1839-44,

v.

iii.

p.

76.)

6Hence

the

Roman

Villicus,

as

overlooker

of

the

agricultural

slaves,

received

\"more

meagre

fare

than

working

slaves,

because

his

work

was

lighter.\"

(Th.

Mommsen,

Rm.Geschichte,

1856,

p.

810.)

7Compare

W.

Th.

Thornton:

\"Over-population

and

its

Remedy,\"

Lond.,

1846.

8Petty.

9\"Its

(labour's)

natural

price

...

consists

in

such

a

quantity

of

necessaries

and

comforts

of

life,

as,

from

the

nature

of

the

climate,

and

the

habits

of

the

country,

are

necessary

to

support

the

labourer,

and

to

enable

him

to

rear

such

a

family

as

may

preserve,

in

the

market,

an

undiminished

supply

of

labour.\"

(R.Torrens:

\"An

Essay

on

the

External

Corn

Trade.\"

Lond.

1815,p.

62.)

The

word

labour

is

here

wrongly

used

for

labour-power.

10Rossi:

\"Cours

d'Econ.

Polit.,\"

Bruxelles,

1842,

p.

370.

11Sismondi:

\"Nouv.

Princ.

etc.,\"

t.

I,

p.

112.

12\"All

labour

is

paid

after

it

has

ceased.\"

(\"An

Inquiry

into

those

Principles

Respecting

the

Nature

of

Demand,\"

&c.,

p.104.)

Le

crédit

commercial

a

d

commencer

au

moment

où

l'ouvrier,

premier

artisan

de

la

production,

a

pu,

au

moyen

de

ses

économies,

attendre

le

salaire

de

son

travail

jusqu'à

la

fin

de

la

semaine,

de

la

quinzaine,

du

mois,

du

trimestre,

&c.\"

[\"The

system

of

commercial

credit

had

to

start

at

the

moment

when

the

labourer,

the

prime

creator

of

products,

could,

thanks

to

his

savings,

wait

for

his

wages

until

the

end

of

the

week.\"]

(Ch.Ganilh:

\"Des

Systèmes

d'Econ.

Polit.\"

2éme

édit.

Paris,

1821,t.

II,

p.

150.)

13\"L'ouvrier

prête

son

industrie,\"

but

adds

Storch

slyly:

he\"risks

nothing\"

except

\"de

perdre

son

salaire

...

l'ouvrier

ne

transmet

rien

de

matériel.\"

[\"The

labourer

lends

his

industry...

the

loss

of

his

wages

...

the

labourer

does

not

hand

over

anything

of

a

material

nature.\"]

(Storch:

\"Cours

d'Econ.

Polit.\"Pétersbourg,

1815,

t.

II.,

p.

37.)

14One

example.

In

London

there

are

two

sorts

of

bakers,the

\"full

priced,\"

who

sell

bread

at

its

full

value,

and

the\"undersellers,\"

who

sell

it

under

its

value.

The

latter

class

comprises

more

than

three-fourths

of

the

total

number

of

bakers.

(p.

xxxii

in

the

Report

of

H.

S.

Tremenheere,commissioner

to

examine

into

\"the

grievances

complained

of

by

the

journeymen

bakers,\"

&c.,

Lond.

1862.)

The

undersellers,

almost

without

exception,

sell

bread

adulterated

with

alum,

soap,

pearl

ashes,

chalk,

Derbyshire

stone-dust,

and

such

like

agreeable

nourishing

and

wholesome

ingredients.(See

the

above

cited

Blue

book,

as

also

the

report

of

\"the

committee

of

1855

on

the

adulteration

of

bread,\"

and

Dr.Hassall's

\"Adulterations

Detected,\"

2nd

Ed.

Lond.

1861.)

Sir

John

Gordon

stated

before

the

committee

of

1855,

that

\"in

consequence

of

these

adulterations,

the

poor

man,

who

lives

on

two

pounds

of

bread

a

day,

does

not

now

get

one

fourth

part

of

nourishing

matter,

let

alone

the

deleterious

effects

on

his

health.\"

Tremenheere

states

(l.c.,

p.

xlviii),

as

the

reason,

why

a

very

large

part

of

the

working-class,

although

well

aware

of

this

adulteration,

nevertheless

accept

the

alum,

stone-dust,&c.,

as

part

of

their

purchase:

that

it

is

for

them

\"a

matter

of

necessity

to

take

from

their

baker

or

from

the

chandler's

shop,such

bread

as

they

choose

to

supply.\"

As

they

are

not

paid

their

wages

before

the

end

of

the

week,

they

in

their

turn

are

unable\"to

pay

for

the

bread

consumed

by

their

families,

during

the

week,

before

the

end

of

the

week,\"

and

Tremenheere

adds

on

the

evidence

of

witnesses,

\"it

is

notorious

that

bread

composed

of

those

mixtures,

is

made

expressly

for

sale

in

this

manner.\"In

many

English

and

still

more

Scotch

agricultural

districts,wages

are

paid

fortnightly

and

even

monthly;

with

such

long

intervals

between

the

payments,

the

agricultural

labourer

is

obliged

to

buy

on

credit....

He

must

pay

higher

prices,and

is

in

fact

tied

to

the

shop

which

gives

him

credit.

Thus

at

Horningham

in

Wilts,

for

example,

where

the

wages

are

monthly,

the

same

flour

that

he

could

buy

elsewhere

at

1s

10d

per

stone,

costs

him

2s

4d

per

stone.

(\"Sixth

Report\"

on

\"Public

Health\"

by

\"The

Medical

Officer

of

the

Privy

Council,

&c.,1864,\"

p.264.)

\"The

block

printers

of

Paisley

and

Kilmarnock

enforced,

by

a

strike,

fortnightly,

instead

of

monthly

payment

of

wages.\"

(\"Reports

of

the

Inspectors

of

Factories

for

31st

Oct.,

1853,\"

p.

34.)

As

a

further

pretty

result

of

the

credit

given

by

the

workmen

to

the

capitalist,

we

may

refer

to

the

method

current

in

many

English

coal

mines,

where

the

labourer

is

not

paid

till

the

end

of

the

month,

and

in

the

meantime,

receives

sums

on

account

from

the

capitalist,

often

in

goods

for

which

the

miner

is

obliged

to

pay

more

than

the

market

price

(Truck

system).

\"It

is

a

common

practice

with

the

coal

masters

to

pay

once

a

month,

and

advance

cash

to

their

workmen

at

the

end

of

each

intermediate

week.

The

cash

is

given

in

the

shop\"

(i.e.,

the

Tommy

shop

which

belongs

to

the

master);

\"the

men

take

it

on

one

side

and

lay

it

out

on

the

other.\"

(\"Children's

Employment

Commission,

III.

Report,\"

Lond.

1864,

p.

38,

n.

192.)