The legislator prohibits foreign competition, and forbids mechanical competition.  For what other means can exist for arresting a propensity which is natural to all men, but that of depriving them of their liberty?

In many countries, it is true, the legislator strikes at only one of these competitions, and confines himself to grumbling at the other.  This only proves one thing, that is, that the legislator is inconsistent.

We need not be surprised at this.  On a wrong road, inconsistency is inevitable; if it were not so, mankind would be sacrificed.  A false principle never has been, and never will be, carried out to the end.

Now for our demonstration, which shall not be a long one.

James B. had two francs which he had gained by two workmen; but it occurs to him that an arrangement of ropes and weights might be made which would diminish the labour by half.  Therefore he obtains the same advantage, saves a franc, and discharges a workman.

He discharges a workman:  this is that which is seen.

And seeing this only, it is said, “See how misery attends civilisation; this is the way that liberty is fatal to equality.  The human mind has made a conquest, and immediately a workman is cast into the gulf of pauperism.  James B. may possibly employ the two workmen, but then he will give them only half their wages, for they will compete with each other, and offer themselves at the lowest price.  Thus the rich are always growing richer, and the poor, poorer.  Society wants remodelling.”  A very fine conclusion, and worthy of the preamble.

Happily, preamble and conclusion are both false, because, behind the half of the phenomenon which is seen, lies the other half which is not seen.

The franc saved by James B. is not seen, no more are the necessary effects of this saving.

Since, in consequence of his invention, James B. spends only one franc on hand labour in the pursuit of a determined advantage, another franc remains to him.

If, then, there is in the world a workman with unemployed arms, there is also in the world a capitalist with an unemployed franc.  These two elements meet and combine, and it is as clear as daylight, that between the supply and demand of labour, and between the supply and demand of wages, the relation is in no way changed.

The invention and the workman paid with the first franc, now perform the work which was formerly accomplished by two workmen.  The second workman, paid with the second franc, realises a new kind of work.

What is the change, then, which has taken place?  An additional national advantage has been gained; in other words, the invention is a gratuitous triumph—­a gratuitous profit for mankind.

From the form which I have given to my demonstration, the following inference might be drawn:—­

“It is the capitalist who reaps all the advantage from machinery.  The working class, if it suffers only temporarily, never profits by it, since, by your own showing, they displace a portion of the national labour, without diminishing it, it is true, but also without increasing it.”