point of view; I confess that I was of the opinion of those who thought that dogs and horses devoured the subsistence of man, but I am much better pleased to think that the food which luxury raises for the nourishment of those animals may, in case of necessity, become nourishment for the human species; and, if a famine should take place, even the animals themselves would afford a resource. MRS. B. Hair-powder we may consider as a kind of granary for the preservation of wheat, for though the powder would not, unless in cases of very great. urgency, be converted into food, the quantity of corn annually grown for the purpose of making hair-powder would, during a moderate scarcity, find its way more readily to the baker's than to the perfumer's shop. 'CAROLINE. And pray, Mrs. B., what do you think of the luxury of the Romans? We read in Pliny of a Roman lady who was dressed in jewels to the amount of 300,000l. I recollect, also, an account of a dish of fish having cost 641. MRS. B. These are but trifling instances of profusion, in Marc Antony expended 60,000l. in an entertainment given to Cleopatra. And the supper of He liogabalus cost 6000l. every night. But nothing can be said in apology for the luxuries of the Romans; they were peculiarly objectionable, because their wealth did not proceed from industry, but : from plunder. Their extravagance and profusion, therefore, far from being a spur to industry, acted in a contrary direction; it encouraged the love of rapine in themselves, whilst it depressed the spirit of industry in the countries subject to their power, by destroying the strongest of all inducements to labour, the security of property. It has been well observed by Macpherson, that "the luxuries of "the Romans cannot be considered as the summit "of a general scale of prosperity; it was a scale "graduated but by one division, which separated "immense wealth and power from abject slavery, "wretchedness and want." In considering the advantages to be derived from luxury, we must, however, carefully remember, that it acts in a twofold manner; whilst on the one hand it encourages industry, on the other it increases expenditure; so far as its productive powers prevail over its prodigal effects, it is beneficial to mankind; but in the contrary case it becomes an evil, and when it encroaches on capital we have seen that it is an evil of the greatest magnitude. The grand object to be kept in view in order to promote the general prosperity of the country, is the increase of capital. But it is not in the power of the legislature to promote this end in any other way than by providing for the security of property; any attempts to interfere either with the disposal of capital or with the nature and extent of expenditure, are equally discouraging to industry. CAROLINE. Whoever, I conceive, augments his capital by savings from his income, increases the general stock of subsistence for the labouring classes; whilst he who spends part of his capital diminishes that stock of subsistence, and consequently the means of employing the labouring classes in its reproduction. Every man ought, therefore, to consider it as a moral duty, independently of his private interest, to keep his expenditure so far within the limits of his income that he may be enabled every year to make some addition to his capital. MRS. B. And the question what that addition should be, must depend entirely upon the extent of his income, and his motives for expenditure. We can only point out illiberal parsimony, and extravagant prodigality as extremes to be avoided; there are so many gradations in the scale between them, that ing to the dictates of his good sense and his conscience, and in so doing should consult, perhaps, the moral philosopher as well as the political economist. He who has a large family to maintain and establish in the world, though more strict economy be required of him, cannot be expected to make savings equal to those of a man of a similar income, who has not the same calls for expenditure. But however large a man's income may be, he has no apology for neglect of economy. Economy is a virtue incumbent on all; a rich man may have sufficient motives to authorise a liberal expenditure, but he can have none for negligence and waste; and however immaterial to himself the loss which waste occasions, he should consider it as so much taken from that fund which provides maintenance and employment for the poor. INDEX. A ACCUMULATION of wealth, 89. has been adopted in almost all countries, 357. Agriculture, introduction of, 19. 43. 182. whether preferable to other branches of industry, 184. most advantageous to newly settled countries, 190. Metayer system of, 256. state of, in France, 257. Agricultural produce, high price of, 204. not susceptible of unlimited increase, 205. causes of its high price, 210, causes which lower its price, 213. high price of, necessary to proportion the consump- the first commodity which a country exports, 398. 421. Alms-giving, effects of, 175. 178. America, increase of population in, 145. exports corn, 398. agriculture of, 421. |