<p><SPAN name="link2HCH0010" id="link2HCH0010"></SPAN></p>
<h2> CHAPTER X. OF WAGES AND PROFIT IN THE DIFFERENT EMPLOYMENTS OF LABOUR AND STOCK. </h2>
<p>The whole of the advantages and disadvantages of the different employments
of labour and stock, must, in the same neighbourhood, be either perfectly
equal, or continually tending to equality. If, in the same neighbourhood,
there was any employment evidently either more or less advantageous than
the rest, so many people would crowd into it in the one case, and so many
would desert it in the other, that its advantages would soon return to the
level of other employments. This, at least, would be the case in a society
where things were left to follow their natural course, where there was
perfect liberty, and where every man was perfectly free both to choose
what occupation he thought proper, and to change it as often as he thought
proper. Every man's interest would prompt him to seek the advantageous,
and to shun the disadvantageous employment.</p>
<p>Pecuniary wages and profit, indeed, are everywhere in Europe extremely
different, according to the different employments of labour and stock. But
this difference arises, partly from certain circumstances in the
employments themselves, which, either really, or at least in the
imagination of men, make up for a small pecuniary gain in some, and
counterbalance a great one in others, and partly from the policy of
Europe, which nowhere leaves things at perfect liberty.</p>
<p>The particular consideration of those circumstances, and of that policy,
will divide this Chapter into two parts.</p>
<h2> PART I. Inequalities arising from the nature of the employments themselves. </h2>
<p>The five following are the principal circumstances which, so far as I have
been able to observe, make up for a small pecuniary gain in some
employments, and counterbalance a great one in others. First, the
agreeableness or disagreeableness of the employments themselves; secondly,
the easiness and cheapness, or the difficulty and expense of learning
them; thirdly, the constancy or inconstancy of employment in them;
fourthly, the small or great trust which must be reposed in those who
exercise them; and, fifthly, the probability or improbability of success
in them.</p>
<p>First, the wages of labour vary with the ease or hardship, the cleanliness
or dirtiness, the honourableness or dishonourableness, of the employment.
Thus in most places, take the year round, a journeyman tailor earns less
than a journeyman weaver. His work is much easier. A journeyman weaver
earns less than a journeyman smith. His work is not always easier, but it
is much cleanlier. A journeyman blacksmith, though an artificer, seldom
earns so much in twelve hours, as a collier, who is only a labourer, does
in eight. His work is not quite so dirty, is less dangerous, and is
carried on in day-light, and above ground. Honour makes a great part of
the reward of all honourable professions. In point of pecuniary gain, all
things considered, they are generally under-recompensed, as I shall
endeavour to shew by and by. Disgrace has the contrary effect. The trade
of a butcher is a brutal and an odious business; but it is in most places
more profitable than the greater part of common trades. The most
detestable of all employments, that of public executioner, is, in
proportion to the quantity of work done, better paid than any common trade
whatever.</p>
<p>Hunting and fishing, the most important employments of mankind in the rude
state of society, become, in its advanced state, their most agreeable
amusements, and they pursue for pleasure what they once followed from
necessity. In the advanced state of society, therefore, they are all very
poor people who follow as a trade, what other people pursue as a pastime.
Fishermen have been so since the time of Theocritus. {See Idyllium xxi.}.
A poacher is everywhere a very poor man in Great Britain. In countries
where the rigour of the law suffers no poachers, the licensed hunter is
not in a much better condition. The natural taste for those employments
makes more people follow them, than can live comfortably by them; and the
produce of their labour, in proportion to its quantity, comes always too
cheap to market, to afford any thing but the most scanty subsistence to
the labourers.</p>
<p>Disagreeableness and disgrace affect the profits of stock in the same
manner as the wages of labour. The keeper of an inn or tavern, who is
never master of his own house, and who is exposed to the brutality of
every drunkard, exercises neither a very agreeable nor a very creditable
business. But there is scarce any common trade in which a small stock
yields so great a profit.</p>
<p>Secondly, the wages of labour vary with the easiness and cheapness, or the
difficulty and expense, of learning the business.</p>
<p>When any expensive machine is erected, the extraordinary work to be
performed by it before it is worn out, it must be expected, will replace
the capital laid out upon it, with at least the ordinary profits. A man
educated at the expense of much labour and time to any of those
employments which require extraordinary dexterity and skill, may be
compared to one of those expensive machines. The work which he learns to
perform, it must be expected, over and above the usual wages of common
labour, will replace to him the whole expense of his education, with at
least the ordinary profits of an equally valuable capital. It must do this
too in a reasonable time, regard being had to the very uncertain duration
of human life, in the same manner as to the more certain duration of the
machine.</p>
<p>The difference between the wages of skilled labour and those of common
labour, is founded upon this principle.</p>
<p>The policy of Europe considers the labour of all mechanics, artificers,
and manufacturers, as skilled labour; and that of all country labourers us
common labour. It seems to suppose that of the former to be of a more nice
and delicate nature than that of the latter. It is so perhaps in some
cases; but in the greater part it is quite otherwise, as I shall endeavour
to shew by and by. The laws and customs of Europe, therefore, in order to
qualify any person for exercising the one species of labour, impose the
necessity of an apprenticeship, though with different degrees of rigour in
different places. They leave the other free and open to every body. During
the continuance of the apprenticeship, the whole labour of the apprentice
belongs to his master. In the meantime he must, in many cases, be
maintained by his parents or relations, and, in almost all cases, must be
clothed by them. Some money, too, is commonly given to the master for
teaching him his trade. They who cannot give money, give time, or become
bound for more than the usual number of years; a consideration which,
though it is not always advantageous to the master, on account of the
usual idleness of apprentices, is always disadvantageous to the
apprentice. In country labour, on the contrary, the labourer, while he is
employed about the easier, learns the more difficult parts of his
business, and his own labour maintains him through all the different
stages of his employment. It is reasonable, therefore, that in Europe the
wages of mechanics, artificers, and manufacturers, should be somewhat
higher than those of common labourers. They are so accordingly, and their
superior gains make them, in most places, be considered as a superior rank
of people. This superiority, however, is generally very small: the daily
or weekly earnings of journeymen in the more common sorts of manufactures,
such as those of plain linen and woollen cloth, computed at an average,
are, in most places, very little more than the day-wages of common
labourers. Their employment, indeed, is more steady and uniform, and the
superiority of their earnings, taking the whole year together, may be
somewhat greater. It seems evidently, however, to be no greater than what
is sufficient to compensate the superior expense of their education.
Education in the ingenious arts, and in the liberal professions, is still
more tedious and expensive. The pecuniary recompence, therefore, of
painters and sculptors, of lawyers and physicians, ought to be much more
liberal; and it is so accordingly.</p>
<p>The profits of stock seem to be very little affected by the easiness or
difficulty of learning the trade in which it is employed. All the
different ways in which stock is commonly employed in great towns seem, in
reality, to be almost equally easy and equally difficult to learn. One
branch, either of foreign or domestic trade, cannot well be a much more
intricate business than another.</p>
<p>Thirdly, the wages of labour in different occupations vary with the
constancy or inconstancy of employment.</p>
<p>Employment is much more constant in some trades than in others. In the
greater part of manufactures, a journeyman maybe pretty sure of employment
almost every day in the year that he is able to work. A mason or
bricklayer, on the contrary, can work neither in hard frost nor in foul
weather, and his employment at all other times depends upon the occasional
calls of his customers. He is liable, in consequence, to be frequently
without any. What he earns, therefore, while he is employed, must not only
maintain him while he is idle, but make him some compensation for those
anxious and desponding moments which the thought of so precarious a
situation must sometimes occasion. Where the computed earnings of the
greater part of manufacturers, accordingly, are nearly upon a level with
the day-wages of common labourers, those of masons and bricklayers are
generally from one-half more to double those wages. Where common labourers
earn four or five shillings a-week, masons and bricklayers frequently earn
seven and eight; where the former earn six, the latter often earn nine and
ten; and where the former earn nine and ten, as in London, the latter
commonly earn fifteen and eighteen. No species of skilled labour, however,
seems more easy to learn than that of masons and bricklayers. Chairmen in
London, during the summer season, are said sometimes to be employed as
bricklayers. The high wages of those workmen, therefore, are not so much
the recompence of their skill, as the compensation for the inconstancy of
their employment.</p>
<p>A house-carpenter seems to exercise rather a nicer and a more ingenious
trade than a mason. In most places, however, for it is not universally so,
his day-wages are somewhat lower. His employment, though it depends much,
does not depend so entirely upon the occasional calls of his customers;
and it is not liable to be interrupted by the weather.</p>
<p>When the trades which generally afford constant employment, happen in a
particular place not to do so, the wages of the workmen always rise a good
deal above their ordinary proportion to those of common labour. In London,
almost all journeymen artificers are liable to be called upon and
dismissed by their masters from day to day, and from week to week, in the
same manner as day-labourers in other places. The lowest order of
artificers, journeymen tailors, accordingly, earn their half-a-crown
a-day, though eighteen pence may be reckoned the wages of common labour.
In small towns and country villages, the wages of journeymen tailors
frequently scarce equal those of common labour; but in London they are
often many weeks without employment, particularly during the summer.</p>
<p>When the inconstancy of employment is combined with the hardship,
disagreeableness, and dirtiness of the work, it sometimes raises the wages
of the most common labour above those of the most skilful artificers. A
collier working by the piece is supposed, at Newcastle, to earn commonly
about double, and, in many parts of Scotland, about three times, the wages
of common labour. His high wages arise altogether from the hardship,
disagreeableness, and dirtiness of his work. His employment may, upon most
occasions, be as constant as he pleases. The coal-heavers in London
exercise a trade which, in hardship, dirtiness, and disagreeableness,
almost equals that of colliers; and, from the unavoidable irregularity in
the arrivals of coal-ships, the employment of the greater part of them is
necessarily very inconstant. If colliers, therefore, commonly earn double
and triple the wages of common labour, it ought not to seem unreasonable
that coal-heavers should sometimes earn four and five times those wages.
In the inquiry made into their condition a few years ago, it was found
that, at the rate at which they were then paid, they could earn from six
to ten shillings a-day. Six shillings are about four times the wages of
common labour in London; and, in every particular trade, the lowest common
earnings may always be considered as those of the far greater number. How
extravagant soever those earnings may appear, if they were more than
sufficient to compensate all the disagreeable circumstances of the
business, there would soon be so great a number of competitors, as, in a
trade which has no exclusive privilege, would quickly reduce them to a
lower rate.</p>
<p>The constancy or inconstancy of employment cannot affect the ordinary
profits of stock in any particular trade. Whether the stock is or is not
constantly employed, depends, not upon the trade, but the trader.</p>
<p>Fourthly, the wages of labour vary according to the small or great trust
which must be reposed in the workmen.</p>
<p>The wages of goldsmiths and jewellers are everywhere superior to those of
many other workmen, not only of equal, but of much superior ingenuity, on
account of the precious materials with which they are entrusted. We trust
our health to the physician, our fortune, and sometimes our life and
reputation, to the lawyer and attorney. Such confidence could not safely
be reposed in people of a very mean or low condition. Their reward must be
such, therefore, as may give them that rank in the society which so
important a trust requires. The long time and the great expense which must
be laid out in their education, when combined with this circumstance,
necessarily enhance still further the price of their labour.</p>
<p>When a person employs only his own stock in trade, there is no trust; and
the credit which he may get from other people, depends, not upon the
nature of the trade, but upon their opinion of his fortune, probity and
prudence. The different rates of profit, therefore, in the different
branches of trade, cannot arise from the different degrees of trust
reposed in the traders.</p>
<p>Fifthly, the wages of labour in different employments vary according to
the probability or improbability of success in them.</p>
<p>The probability that any particular person shall ever be qualified for the
employments to which he is educated, is very different in different
occupations. In the greatest part of mechanic trades success is almost
certain; but very uncertain in the liberal professions. Put your son
apprentice to a shoemaker, there is little doubt of his learning to make a
pair of shoes; but send him to study the law, it as at least twenty to one
if he ever makes such proficiency as will enable him to live by the
business. In a perfectly fair lottery, those who draw the prizes ought to
gain all that is lost by those who draw the blanks. In a profession, where
twenty fail for one that succeeds, that one ought to gain all that should
have been gained by the unsuccessful twenty. The counsellor at law, who,
perhaps, at near forty years of age, begins to make something by his
profession, ought to receive the retribution, not only of his own so
tedious and expensive education, but of that of more than twenty others,
who are never likely to make any thing by it. How extravagant soever the
fees of counsellors at law may sometimes appear, their real retribution is
never equal to this. Compute, in any particular place, what is likely to
be annually gained, and what is likely to be annually spent, by all the
different workmen in any common trade, such as that of shoemakers or
weavers, and you will find that the former sum will generally exceed the
latter. But make the same computation with regard to all the counsellors
and students of law, in all the different Inns of Court, and you will find
that their annual gains bear but a very small proportion to their annual
expense, even though you rate the former as high, and the latter as low,
as can well be done. The lottery of the law, therefore, is very far from
being a perfectly fair lottery; and that as well as many other liberal and
honourable professions, is, in point of pecuniary gain, evidently
under-recompensed.</p>
<p>Those professions keep their level, however, with other occupations; and,
notwithstanding these discouragements, all the most generous and liberal
spirits are eager to crowd into them. Two different causes contribute to
recommend them. First, the desire of the reputation which attends upon
superior excellence in any of them; and, secondly, the natural confidence
which every man has, more or less, not only in his own abilities, but in
his own good fortune.</p>
<p>To excel in any profession, in which but few arrive at mediocrity, it is
the most decisive mark of what is called genius, or superior talents. The
public admiration which attends upon such distinguished abilities makes
always a part of their reward; a greater or smaller, in proportion as it
is higher or lower in degree. It makes a considerable part of that reward
in the profession of physic; a still greater, perhaps, in that of law; in
poetry and philosophy it makes almost the whole.</p>
<p>There are some very agreeable and beautiful talents, of which the
possession commands a certain sort of admiration, but of which the
exercise, for the sake of gain, is considered, whether from reason or
prejudice, as a sort of public prostitution. The pecuniary recompence,
therefore, of those who exercise them in this manner, must be sufficient,
not only to pay for the time, labour, and expense of acquiring the
talents, but for the discredit which attends the employment of them as the
means of subsistence. The exorbitant rewards of players, opera-singers,
opera-dancers, etc. are founded upon those two principles; the rarity and
beauty of the talents, and the discredit of employing them in this manner.
It seems absurd at first sight, that we should despise their persons, and
yet reward their talents with the most profuse liberality. While we do the
one, however, we must of necessity do the other, Should the public opinion
or prejudice ever alter with regard to such occupations, their pecuniary
recompence would quickly diminish. More people would apply to them, and
the competition would quickly reduce the price of their labour. Such
talents, though far from being common, are by no means so rare as
imagined. Many people possess them in great perfection, who disdain to
make this use of them; and many more are capable of acquiring them, if any
thing could be made honourably by them.</p>
<p>The over-weening conceit which the greater part of men have of their own
abilities, is an ancient evil remarked by the philosophers and moralists
of all ages. Their absurd presumption in their own good fortune has been
less taken notice of. It is, however, if possible, still more universal.
There is no man living, who, when in tolerable health and spirits, has not
some share of it. The chance of gain is by every man more or less
over-valued, and the chance of loss is by most men under-valued, and by
scarce any man, who is in tolerable health and spirits, valued more than
it is worth.</p>
<p>That the chance of gain is naturally overvalued, we may learn from the
universal success of lotteries. The world neither ever saw, nor ever will
see, a perfectly fair lottery, or one in which the whole gain compensated
the whole loss; because the undertaker could make nothing by it. In the
state lotteries, the tickets are really not worth the price which is paid
by the original subscribers, and yet commonly sell in the market for
twenty, thirty, and sometimes forty per cent. advance. The vain hopes of
gaining some of the great prizes is the sole cause of this demand. The
soberest people scarce look upon it as a folly to pay a small sum for the
chance of gaining ten or twenty thousand pounds, though they know that
even that small sum is perhaps twenty or thirty per cent. more than the
chance is worth. In a lottery in which no prize exceeded twenty pounds,
though in other respects it approached much nearer to a perfectly fair one
than the common state lotteries, there would not be the same demand for
tickets. In order to have a better chance for some of the great prizes,
some people purchase several tickets; and others, small shares in a still
greater number. There is not, however, a more certain proposition in
mathematics, than that the more tickets you adventure upon, the more
likely you are to be a loser. Adventure upon all the tickets in the
lottery, and you lose for certain; and the greater the number of your
tickets, the nearer you approach to this certainty.</p>
<p>That the chance of loss is frequently undervalued, and scarce ever valued
more than it is worth, we may learn from the very moderate profit of
insurers. In order to make insurance, either from fire or sea-risk, a
trade at all, the common premium must be sufficient to compensate the
common losses, to pay the expense of management, and to afford such a
profit as might have been drawn from an equal capital employed in any
common trade. The person who pays no more than this, evidently pays no
more than the real value of the risk, or the lowest price at which he can
reasonably expect to insure it. But though many people have made a little
money by insurance, very few have made a great fortune; and, from this
consideration alone, it seems evident enough that the ordinary balance of
profit and loss is not more advantageous in this than in other common
trades, by which so many people make fortunes. Moderate, however, as the
premium of insurance commonly is, many people despise the risk too much to
care to pay it. Taking the whole kingdom at an average, nineteen houses in
twenty, or rather, perhaps, ninety-nine in a hundred, are not insured from
fire. Sea-risk is more alarming to the greater part of people; and the
proportion of ships insured to those not insured is much greater. Many
sail, however, at all seasons, and even in time of war, without any
insurance. This may sometimes, perhaps, be done without any imprudence.
When a great company, or even a great merchant, has twenty or thirty ships
at sea, they may, as it were, insure one another. The premium saved up on
them all may more than compensate such losses as they are likely to meet
with in the common course of chances. The neglect of insurance upon
shipping, however, in the same manner as upon houses, is, in most cases,
the effect of no such nice calculation, but of mere thoughtless rashness,
and presumptuous contempt of the risk.</p>
<p>The contempt of risk, and the presumptuous hope of success, are in no
period of life more active than at the age at which young people choose
their professions. How little the fear of misfortune is then capable of
balancing the hope of good luck, appears still more evidently in the
readiness of the common people to enlist as soldiers, or to go to sea,
than in the eagerness of those of better fashion to enter into what are
called the liberal professions.</p>
<p>What a common soldier may lose is obvious enough. Without regarding the
danger, however, young volunteers never enlist so readily as at the
beginning of a new war; and though they have scarce any chance of
preferment, they figure to themselves, in their youthful fancies, a
thousand occasions of acquiring honour and distinction which never occur.
These romantic hopes make the whole price of their blood. Their pay is
less than that of common labourers, and, in actual service, their fatigues
are much greater.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />