When a man labours no more than for his mere natural necessities, he is a poor man, in the usual acceptation =sic= of the word, that is, he has no wealth; {188} and a nation, peopled with such men, would justly be called a poor nation.  When a man labours for nothing more than what he expends on pleasure, or to gratify his taste and passions, it is still the same, he consumes what he creates, and there is an end of the matter; and, whether he creates much or little, as his consumption is regulated by it, no difference is made to society; but, when rent and taxes constitute a part of the price of every commodity, the consumption of every man, whether he pays any taxes directly or not, himself, is attended with an increase to the revenues of those who receive the rent and taxes, and obliges him to create more than he consumes.

—–­ {188} Some philosophers call a man rich, who wants little, and has that little; they are quite right, in their way, but that does not apply here.  Perhaps, according to their definition, the Lazzaroni of Naples are richer than the merchants of London; and, a man who is contented in a parish work-house, is, beyond dispute, rich; to say that such a man is wealthy would be absurd, because wealth, with writers on political economy, implies being possessed of real tangible property. -=-

[end of page #236]

It arises from this, that the aggregate wealth of a people increases with rent and taxes; for, where there are neither, the desire of accumulation is the only thing that increases wealth. {189}

It is for this reason, that, by obliging a man to create more than he himself consumes, taxation increases the wealth of a nation; so that the flourishing state of England is a very natural effect of heavy taxation.  The misery and poverty of those people who have little or nothing to pay, is equally natural, though it does not astonish one quite so much.

As there is nothing in the world without a bound, and a limit, it is clear, that, in laying it down as a principle, that rent and taxes occasion wealth instead of poverty, it is only to be understood, to a certain extent; that is to say, to the length to which the nature of things will admit of the exertion of man augmenting his industry, but not a step farther.

To ascertain this point would be to solve a most curious problem; observing, that the solution would, in every case, depend on a great variety of particular circumstances.

Something like a general investigation, however, is possible.  It will not be accurate, nor is that wanted, but it may lay the foundation for understanding the matter better at a future period.

In London, rent and taxes are heavier than in any other part of the kingdom, and in Scotland they are less than in any other; yet, the working people, from all parts of the kingdom, come to London, and from the poorest places, in the greatest numbers.  Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, are the poor countries, lightly taxed, and from them