第47章

Ineverycountrythereisacertainaverageintensityoflabourbelowwhichthelabourfortheproductionofacommodityrequiresmorethanthesociallynecessarytime，andthereforedoesnotreckonaslabourofnormalquality。Onlyadegreeofintensityabovethenationalaverageaffects，inagivencountry，themeasureofvaluebythemeredurationoftheworking—time。

Thisisnotthecaseontheuniversalmarket，whoseintegralpartsaretheindividualcountries。Theaverageintensityoflabourchangesfromcountrytocountry;hereitisgreater，thereless。Thesenationalaveragesformascale，whoseunitofmeasureistheaverageunitofuniversallabour。

Themoreintensenationallabour，therefore，ascomparedwiththelessintense，producesinthesametimemorevalue，whichexpressesitselfinmoremoney。

Butthelawofvalueinitsinternationalapplicationisyetmoremodifiedbythefactthatontheworld—marketthemoreproductivenationallabourreckonsalsoasthemoreintense，solongasthemoreproductivenationisnotcompelledbycompetitiontolowerthesellingpriceofitscommoditiestotheleveloftheirvalue。

Inproportionascapitalistproductionisdevelopedinacountry，inthesameproportiondothenationalintensityandproductivityoflabourthereriseabovetheinternationallevel。[2]Thedifferentquantitiesofcommoditiesofthesamekind，producedindifferentcountriesinthesameworking—time，have，therefore，unequalinternationalvalues，whichareexpressedindifferentprices，i。e。，insumsofmoneyvaryingaccordingtointernationalvalues。Therelativevalueofmoneywill，therefore，belessinthenationwithmoredevelopedcapitalistmodeofproductionthaninthenationwithlessdeveloped。Itfollows，then，thatthenominalwages，theequivalentoflabour—powerexpressedinmoney，willalsobehigherinthefirstnationthaninthesecond;whichdoesnotatallprovethatthisholdsalsofortherealwages，i。e。，forthemeansofsubsistenceplacedatthedisposalofthelabourer。

Butevenapartfromtheserelativedifferencesofthevalueofmoneyindifferentcountries，itwillbefound，frequently，thatthedailyorweekly，&tc。，wageinthefirstnationishigherthaninthesecond，whilsttherelativepriceoflabour，i。e。，thepriceoflabourascomparedbothwithsurplus—valueandwiththevalueoftheproduct，standshigherinthesecondthaninthefirst。[3]

J。W。Cowell，memberoftheFactoryCommissionof1833，aftercarefulinvestigationofthespinningtrade，cametotheconclusionthat"inEnglandwagesarevirtuallylowertothecapitalist，thoughhighertotheoperativethanontheContinentofEurope。"[4]TheEnglishFactoryInspector，AlexanderRedgrave，inhisreportofOct。

31st，1866，provesbycomparativestatisticswithcontinentalstates，thatinspiteoflowerwagesandmuchlongerworking—time，continentallabouris，inproportiontotheproduct，dearerthanEnglish。AnEnglishmanagerofacottonfactoryinOldenburgdeclaresthattheworkingtimetherelastedfrom5:30a。m。to8p。m。，Saturdaysincluded，andthattheworkpeoplethere，whenunderEnglishoverlookers，didnotsupplyduringthistimequitesomuchproductastheEnglishin10hours，butunderGermanoverlookersmuchless。WagesaremuchlowerthaninEngland，inmanycases50%，butthenumberofhandsinproportiontothemachinerywasmuchgreater，incertaindepartmentsintheproportionof5:3。

Mr。RedgravegivesveryfulldetailsastotheRussiancottonfactories。

ThedataweregivenhimbyanEnglishmanageruntilrecentlyemployedthere。

OnthisRussiansoil，sofruitfulofallinfamies，theoldhorrorsoftheearlydaysofEnglishfactoriesareinfullswing。Themanagersare，ofcourse，English，asthenativeRussiancapitalistisofnouseinfactorybusiness。Despiteallover—work，continueddayandnight，despitethemostshamefulunder—paymentoftheworkpeople，Russianmanufacturemanagestovegetateonlybyprohibitionofforeigncompetition。

Igive，inconclusion，acomparativetableofMr。Redgrave’s，ontheaveragenumberofspindlesperfactoryandperspinnerinthedifferentcountriesofEurope。Hehimselfremarksthathehadcollectedthesefiguresafewyearsago，andthatsincethattimethesizeofthefactoriesandthenumberofspindlesperlabourerinEnglandhasincreased。Hesupposes，however，anapproximatelyequalprogressinthecontinentalcountriesmentioned，sothatthenumbersgivenwouldstillhavetheirvalueforpurposesofcomparison。

AVERAGENUMBEROF

SPINDLESPERFACTORY

England，averageofspindlesperfactory12，600

France，averageofspindlesperfactory1，500

Prussia，averageofspindlesperfactory1，500

Belgium，averageofspindlesperfactory4，000

Saxony，averageofspindlesperfactory4，500

Austria，averageofspindlesperfactory7，000

Switzerland，averageofspindlesperfactory8，000

AVERAGENUMBEROF

PERSONSEMPLOYEDTOSPINDLES

Franceonepersonto14spindlesRussiaonepersonto28spindlesPrussiaonepersonto37spindlesBavariaonepersonto46spindlesAustriaonepersonto49spindlesBelgiumonepersonto50spindlesSaxonyonepersonto50spindlesSwitzerlandonepersonto55spindlesSmallerStatesofGermanyonepersonto55spindlesGreatBritainonepersonto74spindles"Thiscomparison，"saysMr。Redgrave，"isyetmoreunfavorabletoGreatBritain，inasmuchasthereissolargeanumberoffactoriesinwhichweavingbypoweriscarriedoninconjunctionwithspinning"（whilstinthetabletheweaversarenotdeducted），"andthefactoriesabroadarechieflyspinningfactories;ifitwerepossibletocomparelikewithlike，strictly，Icouldfindmanycottonspinningfactoriesinmydistrictinwhichmulescontaining2，200spindlesaremindedbyoneman（theminder）andtwoassistantsonly，turningoffdaily220lbs。ofyarn，measuring400milesinlength。"[5]

ItiswellknownthatinEasternEurope，aswellasinAsia，Englishcompanieshaveundertakentheconstructionofrailways，andhave，inmakingthem，employedsidebysidewiththenativelabourers，acertainnumberofEnglishworking—men。Compelledbypracticalnecessity，theythushavehadtotakeintoaccountthenationaldifferenceintheintensityoflabour，butthishasbroughtthemnoloss。Theirexperienceshowsthateveniftheheightofwagescorrespondsmoreorlesswiththeaverageintensityoflabour，therelativepriceoflabourvariesgenerallyintheinversedirection。

Inan"EssayontheRateofWages，"[6]oneofhisfirsteconomicwritings，H。Careytriestoprovethatthewagesofthedifferentnationsaredirectlyproportionaltothedegreeofproductivenessofthenationalworking—days，inordertodrawfromthisinternationalrelationtheconclusionthatwageseverywhereriseandfallinproportiontotheproductivenessoflabour。Thewholeofouranalysisoftheproductionofsurplus—valueshowstheabsurdityofthisconclusion，evenifCareyhimselfhadprovedhispremisesinsteadof，afterhisusualuncriticalandsuperficialfashion，shufflingtoandfroaconfusedmassofstatisticalmaterials。Thebestofitisthathedoesnotassertthatthingsactuallyareastheyoughttobeaccordingtohistheory。ForStateinterventionhasfalsifiedthenaturaleconomicrelations。Thedifferentnationalwagesmustbereckoned，therefore，asifthatpartofeachthatgoestotheStateintheformoftaxes，cametothelabourerhimself。OughtnotMr。Careytoconsiderfurtherwhetherthose"Stateexpenses"arenotthe"natural"

fruitsofcapitalisticdevelopment？Thereasoningisquiteworthyofthemanwhofirstdeclaredtherelationsofcapitalistproductiontobeeternallawsofnatureandreason，whosefree，harmoniousworkingisonlydisturbedbytheinterventionoftheState，inorderafterwardstodiscoverthatthediabolicalinfluenceofEnglandontheworld—market（aninfluencewhich，itappears，doesnotspringfromthenaturallawsofcapitalistproduction）

necessitatesStateintervention，i。e。，theprotectionofthoselawsofnatureandreasonbytheState，aliastheSystemofProtection。HediscoveredfurtherthatthetheoremsofRicardoandothers，inwhichexistingsocialantagonismsandcontradictionsareformulated，arenottheidealproductoftherealeconomicmovement，butonthecontrary，thattherealantagonismsofcapitalistproductioninEnglandandelsewherearetheresultofthetheoriesofRicardoandothers！Finallyhediscoveredthatitis，inthelastresort，commercethatdestroystheinbornbeautiesandharmoniesofthecapitalistmodeofproduction。Astepfurtherandhewill，perhaps，discoverthattheoneevilincapitalistproductioniscapitalitself。

Onlyamanwithsuchatrociouswantofthecriticalfacultyandsuchspuriouseruditiondeserved，inspiteofhisProtectionistheresy，tobecomethesecretsourceoftheharmoniouswisdomofaBastiat，andofalltheotherFree—tradeoptimistsoftoday。

Footnotes[1]"Itisnotaccuratetosaythatwages"（hedealsherewiththeirmoneyexpression）"areincreased，becausetheypurchasemoreofacheaperarticle。"

（DavidBuchananinhiseditionofAdamSmith’s"WealthofNations，"1814，Vol。1，p。417，note。）

[2]Weshallinquire，inanotherplace，whatcircumstancesinrelationtoproductivitymaymodifythislawforindividualbranchesofindustry。

[3]JamesAndersonremarksinhispolemicagainstAdamSmith:"Itdeserves，likewise，toberemarked，thatalthoughtheapparentpriceofLabourisusuallylowerinpoorcountries，wheretheproduceofthesoil，andgrainingeneral，ischeap;yetitisinfactforthemostpartreallyhigherthaninothercountries。Foritisnotthewagesthatisgiventothelabourerperdaythatconstitutestherealpriceoflabour，althoughitisitsapparentprice。Therealpriceisthatwhichacertainquantityofworkperformedactuallycoststheemployer;andconsideredinthislight，labourisinalmostallcasescheaperinrichcountriesthaninthosethatarepoorer，althoughthepriceofgrainandotherprovisionsisusuallymuchlowerinthelastthaninthefirst……LabourestimatedbythedayismuchlowerinScotlandthaninEngland……LabourbythepieceisgenerallycheaperinEngland。"（JamesAnderson，"ObservationsontheMeansofExcitingaSpiritofNationalIndustry，"&tc。，Edin。1777，pp。350，351。）Onthecontrary，lownessofwagesproduces，initsturn，dearnessoflabour。"LabourbeingdearerinIrelandthanitisinEngland……becausethewagesaresomuchlower。"（N。2079in"RoyalCommissiononRailways，Minutes，