Wages - Why and How Much?
September 11, 2014Adam Smith |
Adam Smith.
(1723–1790). Wealth of Nations.
Vol. 10, pp. 66-74 of
The Harvard Classics
What regulates
wages, on what do they depend? Adam Smith, world's authority on
economic problems, advances his theories on these matters.
Book I
VIII. Of the Wages of Labour
THE PRODUCE of labour
constitutes the natural recompence or wages of labour.
In that original state of things,
which precedes both the appropriation of land and the accumulation of
stock, the whole produce of labour belongs to the labourer. He has
neither landlord nor master to share with him.
Had this state continued, the wages of
labour would have augmented with all those improvements in its
productive powers, to which the division of labour gives occasion.
All things would gradually have become cheaper. They would have been
produced by a smaller quantity of labour; and as the commodities
produced by equal quantities of labour would naturally in this state
of things be exchanged for one another, they would have been
purchased likewise with the produce of a smaller quantity.
But though all things would have
become cheaper in reality, in appearance many things might have
become dearer than before, or have been exchanged for a greater
quantity of other goods. Let us suppose, for example, that in the
greater part of employments the productive powers of labour had been
improved to tenfold, or that a day’s labour could produce ten times
the quantity of work which it had done originally; but that in a
particular employment they had been improved only to double, or that
a day’s labour could produce only twice the quantity of work which
it had done before. In exchanging the produce of a day’s labour in
the greater part of employments, for that of a day’s labour in this
particular one, ten times the original quantity of work in them would
purchase only twice the original quantity in it. Any particular
quantity in it, therefore, a pound weight, for example, would appear
to be five times dearer than before. In reality, however, it would be
twice as cheap. Though it required five times the quantity of other
goods to purchase it, it would require only half the quantity of
labour either to purchase or to produce it. The acquisition,
therefore, would be twice as easy as before.
But this original state of things, in
which the labourer enjoyed the whole produce of his own labour, could
not last beyond the first introduction of the appropriation of land
and the accumulation of stock. It was at an end, therefore, long
before the most considerable improvements were made in the productive
powers of labour, and it would be to no purpose to trace further what
might have been its effects upon the recompence or wages of labour.
As soon as land becomes private
property, the landlord demands a share of almost all the produce
which the labourer can either raise, or collect from it. His rent
makes the first deduction from the produce of the labour which is
employed upon land.
It seldom happens that the person who
tills the ground has wherewithal to maintain himself till he reaps
the harvest. His maintenance is generally advanced to him from the
stock of a master, the farmer who employs him, and who would have no
interest to employ him, unless he was to share in the produce of his
labour, or unless his stock was to be replaced to him with a profit.
This profit makes a second deduction from the produce of the labour
which is employed upon land.
The produce of almost all other labour
is liable to the like deduction of profit. In all arts and
manufactures the greater part of the workmen stand in need of a
master to advance them the materials of their work, and their wages
and maintenance till it be compleated. He shares in the produce of
their labour, or in the value which it adds to the materials upon
which it is bestowed; and in this share consists his profit.
It sometimes happens, indeed, that a
single independent workman has stock sufficient both to purchase the
materials of his work, and to maintain himself till it be compleated.
He is both master and workman, and enjoys the whole produce of his
own labour, or the whole value which it adds to the materials upon
which it is bestowed. It includes what are usually two distinct
revenues, belonging to two distinct persons, the profits of stock,
and the wages of labour.
Such cases, however, are not very
frequent, and in every part of Europe, twenty workmen serve under a
master for one that is independent; and the wages of labour are every
where understood to be, what they usually are, when the labourer is
one person, and the owner of the stock which employs him another.
What are the common wages of labour,
depends every where upon the contract usually made between those two
parties, whose interests are by no means the same. The workmen desire
to get as much, the masters to give as little as possible. The former
are disposed to combine in order to raise, the latter in order to
lower the wages of labour.
It is not, however, difficult to
foresee which of the two parties must, upon all ordinary occasions,
have the advantage in the dispute, and force the other into a
compliance with their terms. The masters, being fewer in number, can
combine much more easily; and the law, besides, authorises, or at
least does not prohibit their combinations, while it prohibits those
of the workmen. We have no acts of parliament against combining to
lower the price of work; but many against combining to raise it. In
all such disputes the masters can hold out much longer. A landlord, a
farmer, a master, manufacturer, or merchant, though they did not
employ a single workman could generally live a year or two upon the
stocks which they have already acquired. Many workmen could not
subsist a week, few could subsist a month, and scarce any a year
without employment. In the long-run the workman may be as necessary
to his master as his master is to him; but the necessity is not so
immediate.
We rarely hear, it has been said, of
the combinations of masters; though frequently of those of workmen.
But whoever imagines, upon this account, that masters rarely combine,
is as ignorant of the world as of the subject. Masters are always and
every where in a sort of tacit, but constant and uniform combination,
not to raise the wages of labour above their actual rate. To violate
this combination is every where a most unpopular action, and a sort
of reproach to a master among his neighbours and equals. We seldom,
indeed, hear of this combination, because it is the usual, and one
may say, the natural state of things which nobody ever hears of.
Masters too sometimes enter into particular combinations to sink the
wages of labour even below this rate. These are always conducted with
the utmost silence and secrecy, till the moment of execution, and
when the workmen yield, as they sometimes do, without resistance,
though severely felt by them, they are never heard of by other
people. Such combinations, however, are frequently resisted by a
contrary defensive combination of the workmen; who sometimes too,
without any provocation of this kind, combine of their own accord to
raise the price of their labour. Their usual pretences are, sometimes
the high price of provisions; sometimes the great profit which their
masters make by their work. But whether their combinations be
offensive or defensive, they are always abundantly heard of. In order
to bring the point to a speedy decision, they have always recourse to
the loudest clamour, and sometimes to the most shocking violence and
outrage. They are desperate, and act with the folly and extravagance
of desperate men, who must either starve, or frighten their masters
into an immediate compliance with their demands. The masters upon
these occasions are just as clamorous upon the other side, and never
cease to call aloud for the assistance of the civil magistrate, and
the rigorous execution of those laws which have been enacted with so
much severity against the combinations of servants, labourers, and
journeymen. The workmen, accordingly, very seldom derive any
advantage from the violence of those tumultuous combinations, which,
partly from the interposition of the civil magistrate, partly from
the superior steadiness of the masters, partly from the necessity
which the greater part of the workmen are under of submitting for the
sake of present subsistence, generally end in nothing, but the
punishment or ruin of the ringleaders.
But though in disputes with their
workmen, masters must generally have the advantage, there is however
a certain rate below which it seems impossible to reduce, for any
considerable time, the ordinary wages even of the lowest species of
labour.
A man must always live by his work,
and his wages must at least be sufficient to maintain him. They must
even upon most occasions be somewhat more; otherwise it would be
impossible for him to bring up a family, and the race of such workmen
could not last beyond the first generation. Mr. Cantillon seems, upon
this account, to suppose that the lowest species of common labourers
must every where earn at least double their own maintenance, in order
that one with another they may be enabled to bring up two children;
the labour of the wife, on account of her necessary attendance on the
children, being supposed no more than sufficient to provide for
herself. But one-half the children born, it is computed, die before
the age of manhood. The poorest labourers, therefore, according to
this account, must, one with another, attempt to rear at least four
children, in order that two may have an equal chance of living to
that age. But the necessary maintenance of four children, it is
supposed, may be nearly equal to that of one man. The labour of an
able-bodied slave, the same author adds, is computed to be worth
double his maintenance; and that of the meanest labourer, he thinks,
cannot be worth less than that of an able-bodied slave. Thus far at
least seems certain, that, in order to bring up a family, the labour
of the husband and wife together must, even in the lowest species of
common labour, be able to earn something more than what is precisely
necessary for their own maintenance; but in what proportion, whether
in that above mentioned, or in any other, I shall not take upon me to
determine.
There are certain circumstances,
however, which sometimes give the labourers an advantage, and enable
them to raise their wages considerably above this rate; evidently the
lowest which is consistent with common humanity.
When in any country the demand for
those who live by wages, labourers, journeymen, servants of every
kind, is continually increasing; when every year furnishes employment
for a greater number than had been employed the year before, the
workmen have no occasion to combine in order to raise their wages.
The scarcity of hands occasions a competition among masters, who bid
against one another, in order to get workmen, and thus voluntarily
break through the natural combination of masters not to raise wages.
The demand for those who live by
wages, it is evident, cannot increase but in proportion to the
increase of the funds which are destined for the payment of wages.
These funds are of two kinds; first, the revenue which is over and
above what is necessary for the maintenance; and, secondly, the stock
which is over and above what is necessary for the employment of their
masters.
When the landlord, annuitant, or
monied man, has a greater revenue than what he judges sufficient to
maintain his own family, he employs either the whole or a part of the
surplus in maintaining one or more menial servants. Increase this
surplus, and he will naturally increase the number of those servants.
When an independent workman, such as a
weaver or shoemaker, has got more stock than what is sufficient to
purchase the materials of his own work, and to maintain himself till
he can dispose of it, he naturally employs one or more journeymen
with the surplus, in order to make a profit by their work. Increase
this surplus, and he will naturally increase the number of his
journeymen.
The demand for those who live by
wages, therefore, necessarily increases with the increase of the
revenue and stock of every country, and cannot possibly increase
without it. The increase of revenue and stock is the increase of
national wealth. The demand for those who live by wages, therefore,
naturally increases with the increase of national wealth, and cannot
possibly increase without it.
It is not the actual greatness of
national wealth, but its continual increase, which occasions a rise
in the wages of labour. It is not, accordingly, in the richest
countries, but in the most thriving, or in those which are growing
rich the fastest, that the wages of labour are highest. England is
certainly, in the present times, a much richer country than any part
of North America. The wages of labour, however, are much higher in
North America than in any part of England. In the province of New
York, common labourers earn three shillings and sixpence currency,
equal to two shillings sterling, a day; ship carpenters, ten
shillings and sixpence currency, with a pint of rum worth sixpence
sterling, equal in all to six shillings and sixpence sterling; house
carpenters and bricklayers, eight shillings currency, equal to four
shillings and sixpence sterling; journeymen taylors, five shillings
currency, equal to about two shillings and tenpence sterling. These
prices are all above the London price; and wages are said to be as
high in the other colonies as in New York. The price of provisions is
every where in North America much lower than in England. A dearth has
never been known there. In the worst seasons, they have always had a
sufficiency for themselves, though less for exportation. If the money
price of labour, therefore, be higher than it is any where in the
mother country, its real price, the real command of the necessaries
and conveniencies of life which it conveys to the labourer, must be
higher in a still greater proportion.
But though North America is not yet so
rich as England, it is much more thriving, and advancing with much
greater rapidity to the further acquisition of riches. The most
decisive mark of the prosperity of any country is the increase of the
number of its inhabitants. In Great Britain, and most other European
countries, they are not supposed to double in less than five hundred
years. In the British colonies in North America, it has been found,
that they double in twenty or five-and-twenty years. Nor in the
present times is this increase principally owing to the continual
importation of new inhabitants, but to the great multiplication of
the species. Those who live to old age, it is said, frequently see
there from fifty to a hundred, and sometimes many more, descendants
from their own body. Labour is there so well rewarded that a numerous
family of children, instead of being a burthen is a source of
opulence and prosperity to the parents. The labour of each child,
before it can leave their house, is computed to be worth a hundred
pounds clear gain to them. A young widow with four or five young
children, who, among the middling or inferior ranks of people in
Europe, would have so little chance for a second husband, is there
frequently courted as a sort of fortune. The value of children is the
greatest of all encouragements to marriage. We cannot, therefore,
wonder that the people in North America should generally marry very
young. Notwithstanding the great increase occasioned by such early
marriages, there is a continual complaint of the scarcity of hands in
North America. The demand for labourers, the funds destined for
maintaining them, increase, it seems, still faster than they can find
labourers to employ.
Though the wealth of a country should
be very great, yet if it has been long stationary, we must not expect
to find the wages of labour very high in it. The funds destined for
the payment of wages, the revenue and stock of its inhabitants, may
be of the greatest extent; but if they have continued for several
centuries of the same, or very nearly of the same extent, the number
of labourers employed every year could easily supply, and even more
than supply, the number wanted the following year. There could seldom
be any scarcity of hands, nor could the masters be obliged to bid
against one another in order to get them. The hands, on the contrary,
would, in this case, naturally multiply beyond their employment.
There would be a constant scarcity of employment, and the labourers
would be obliged to bid against one another in order to get it. If in
such a country the wages of labour had ever been more than sufficient
to maintain the labourer, and to enable him to bring up a family, the
competition of the labourers and interest of the masters would soon
reduce them to this lowest rate which is consistent with common
humanity, China has been long one of the richest, that is, one of the
most fertile, best cultivated, most industrious, and most populous
countries in the world. It seems, however, to have been long
stationary. Marco Polo, who visited it more than five hundred years
ago, describes its cultivation, industry, and populousness, almost in
the same terms in which they are described by travellers in the
present times. It had perhaps, even long before his time, acquired
that full complement of riches which the nature of its laws and
institutions permits it to acquire. The accounts of all travellers,
inconsistent in many other respects, agree in the low wages of
labour, and in the difficulty which a labourer finds in bringing up a
family in China. If by digging the ground a whole day he can get what
will purchase a small quantity of rice in the evening, he is
contented. The condition of artificers is, if possible, still worse.
Instead of waiting indolently in their work houses, for the calls of
their customers, as in Europe, they are continually running about the
streets with the tools of their respective trades offering their
service, and as it were begging employment. The poverty of the lower
ranks of people in China far surpasses that of the most beggarly
nations in Europe. In the neighbourhood of Canton many hundreds, it
is commonly said, many thousand families have no habitation on the
land, but live constantly in little fishing boats upon the rivers and
canals. The subsistence which they find there is so scanty that they
are eager to fish up the nastiest garbage thrown overboard from any
European ship. Any carrion, the carcase of a dead dog or cat, for
example, though half putrid and stinking, is as welcome to them as
the most wholesome food to the people of other countries. Marriage is
encouraged in China, not by the profitableness of children, but by
the liberty of destroying them. In all great towns several are every
night exposed in the street, or drowned like puppies in the water.
The performance of this horrid office is even said to be the avowed
business by which some people earn their subsistence.
China, however, though it may perhaps
stand still, does not seem to go backwards. Its towns are no-where
deserted by their inhabitants. The lands which had once been
cultivated are no-where neglected. The same or very nearly the same
annual labour must therefore continue to be performed, and the funds
destined for maintaining it must not, consequently, be sensibly
diminished. The lowest class of labourers, therefore, notwithstanding
their scanty subsistence, must some way or another make shift to
continue their race so far as to keep up their usual numbers.
But it would be otherwise in a country
where the funds destined for the maintenance of labour were sensibly
decaying. Every year the demand for servants and labourers would, in
all the different classes of employments, be less than it had been
the year before. Many who had been bred in the superior classes, not
being able to find employment in their own business, would be glad to
seek it in the lowest. The lowest class being not only overstocked
with its own workmen, but with the overflowings of all the other
classes, the competition for employment would be so great in it, as
to reduce the wages of labour to the most miserable and scanty
subsistence of the labourer. Many would not be able to find
employment even upon these hard terms, but would either starve, or be
driven to seek a subsistence either by begging, or by the
perpetration perhaps of the greatest enormities. Want, famine, and
mortality would immediately prevail in that class, and from thence
extend themselves to all the superior classes, till the number of
inhabitants in the country was reduced to what could easily be
maintained by the revenue and stock which remained in it, and which
had escaped either the tyranny or calamity which had destroyed the
rest. This perhaps is nearly the present state of Bengal, and of some
other of the English settlements in the East Indies. In a fertile
country which had before been much depopulated, where subsistence,
consequently, should not be very difficult, and where,
notwithstanding, three or four hundred thousand people die of hunger
in one year, we may be assured that the funds destined for the
maintenance of the labouring poor are fast decaying. The difference
between the genius of the British constitution which protects and
governs North America, and that of the mercantile company which
oppresses and domineers in the East Indies, cannot perhaps be better
illustrated than by the different state of those countries.
0 comments