Book II — ========
Chap. I
Of the Interior Causes of Decline, arising from the Possession of Wealth. — Its general Operation on the Habits of Life, Manners, Education, and Ways of thinking and acting of the Inhabitants of a Country.
As necessity was the first cause of industry and invention, from which wealth and power arise, it is natural that, when the action of that necessity becomes less urgent, those exertions to which it gave rise will gradually fall away. Though habit may sometimes counteract this tendency, in the individual, yet, taken upon a general scale, and from generation to generation, it must inevitably take place.
In this case, an individual who has obtained wealth enjoys an advantage, which no nation ever can expect. With only common prudence, he may cease from exertion or industry, and remain in affluence. If he has property in land, he may let it, and live on the rent; if in money, he may lend it, and live on the interest; but one nation cannot let its lands, or lend its capital to another. It must, by its own industry, render them productive. The great bulk of every nation, then, must be industrious, however wealthy it may be; otherwise, the wealth will soon be dissipated and disappear. The people of Flanders cannot, for example, cultivate the fields of the French, and live in Flanders; and, if the agriculture of a country is neglected, that country must soon become poor and miserable. 67
[end of page #81]
It is not absolutely necessary, then, for an individual to conciliate affluence with industry, or, which is the same thing, to preserve one of the effects of necessity, after the necessity has ceased to exist. But if it were possible for a sum of money, or property of any sort, to be given to each individual in a nation, which would be sufficient, in the midst of an industrious people, to enable him to live in perfect idleness, the whole nation could not become idle. Such a case never can exist, as that of all the individuals in a country becoming sufficiently rich to live without labour. But something approaching towards that state of things actually does take place, when, by the general increase of wealth, the necessity for labour is diminished. The number of idle people is constantly augmenting; and even those who continue to labour do it less intensely than when the operation of necessity was more severe. When a cause is diminished, the effect must in time fall off in proportion.
With individuals, nature has given very powerful auxiliaries to necessity, which strengthen and prolong its operation, but which do not operate equally on nations.
Habit or custom is the one auxiliary, and ambition or avarice is the other.
Habit, in all cases, diminishes the reluctance to labour, which is inherent in the most part of mankind, and sometimes entirely overcomes it. 68 Ambition, which appears under many different forms, renders labour absolutely an enjoyment. Sometimes ambition is merely a desire of amassing property, an avaricious disposition: sometimes it is a desire to create a family; and even, sometimes, the vain and delusive idea of retiring from business, and becoming happy in a state of total idleness, spurs a man on to labour. It is a very curious, but well-known fact, that, after necessity has entirely ceased to promote industry, the love of complete idleness, and the hope of enjoying it at some distant date, leads the wealthy man on, to his last hour, in a train of augmented industry. Thus has nature most wisely counteracted
[end of page #82]
the disposition of man to idleness; by making the very propensity to it, after a certain time, active in promoting industry.
But this can never be the case with a race of men: 69 and, as a nation consists of a greater number of individuals, so, also, its existence consists of successive generations.
There is a difference between idleness and inaction. It is the natural propensity of man to be idle, but not to be inactive. Enjoyment is his aim, after he has secured the means of existence. Enjoyment and idleness are supposed, in many cases, to go hand in hand; at any rate, they can be reconciled, whereas inaction and enjoyment are irreconcilable. 70
But we may still go farther. As taste for any particular enjoyment is acquired when a man is young, and the same taste continues in a more advanced age; a man who has been long in business has had no time to acquire a taste for those enjoyments that are incompatible with, or perhaps that admit of being substituted for it.
Reading the study of the fine arts, and such other means of employing time as men enjoy, who, at an early period of life, are exempted from labour, afford no amusement to the man who has been always accustomed to a life of business, 71 with whom there is an absolute ne-
Hunting and fishing, the two most anxious and painful occupations in the world, are, in all countries, followed by the affluent and idle as amusements; they want to interest the mind, and occupy themselves. Gaming, which is attended with very painful sensations, is followed much more frequently from propensity than from the love of gain; and, indeed, it would appear, that a life without occupations that interest the mind, is of all others the most insipid: it appears to be worse, it appears to be miserable.
[end of page #83]
cessity of filling up the time in one way or another. A certain portion of time may be spent in company; but even that, to be enjoyed, must be spent in the society of men of the same class. The inducement, then, to a man who has dedicated the first part of his life advantageously to industry, to become idle, is not great, even when he is at free liberty to follow his inclination.
It is totally different with a young man; his propensity is to idleness, without any of those favourable circumstances that counteract that propensity. Necessity alone can be expected to operate on him; it is in vain to seek for any other substitute. Not that we mean, by idleness, to signify inaction; but that sort of idleness, which resists regular labour. There is a natural propensity to action, but then it is a propensity that operates irregularly, unless under the influence of necessity. It is a continued and regular exertion, directed to a proper object, that is wanted to obtain wealth; to procure this, it is well to imitate nature, and create necessity.
But, in proportion as a nation grows wealthy, that necessity is done away. It is of the art of prolonging necessity, or rather of reconciling necessity with affluence and ease, for which we are going to search, that we may, by that means, reconcile affluence with industry.
We must, in the first place, find what the natural operation is by which industry leaves a country.
When a country is in a state of poverty, it maintains the same degree of industry, from generation to generation, without any effort. The new race is brought up in the same way that the former was before it, and the same pressure of necessity, acting on the same desire (but no greater desire) to shun labour, produces the same effect at one time that it did at another. The son of a man, who has arrived at a greater degree of affluence than that to which he was born, is generally brought up differently. He is not brought up so hardily in his infancy as his father was, nor so soon called to labour; and probably when he is called to it, he is neither called with so imperious a voice, nor is he so willing to obey the call.
Though we do not live long enough to see an example of this operation on a whole nation, the progression being too slow for the life [end of page #84] of a man, yet we see it in different parts of the same country, that are in different degrees of advancement. How frequent are the instances of men, bred in distant counties, (particularly in the North,) bringing all that industry and those habits of labour to London, that the poverty of their parents, and the state of their part of the country naturally occasioned. Some of those have arrived at affluence, and many of them have to competency; and even those who do not arrive at a comparatively higher rank in London, than their father held in his own county, bring up their children in a very different manner.
Suppose, for example, a blacksmith, from Northumberland, or a baker, from Scotland, settles in London, as his father did at Newcastle or Edinburgh, his son or sons will be bred very differently from what he was; and, after their father’s death, the business will most probably go to some new comer, from a distant county.
The father was brought up with the necessity of labouring, or the alternative of wanting food to eat. From his earliest days, he considered himself as fortunate if he could obtain a competent living by honest industry; and this impression, with the habits acquired while it was strong, lead a man, so brought up, to fill his place in life with honour and advantage.
The son, who sees that his father is in affluence, and who partakes of the fruits of a whole life of industry, seldom considers that he must continue that industry, otherwise, that the affluence will cease with the life of his father. It is impossible to make a young man, brought up in this manner, feel as his father did; and, not having the same impulse given to him at first, he never can set off in his course of life with the same energy.
But the cause of this evil does not stop here. Frequently the mother is an enemy to the industry of her son; and between the workings of real affection, badly exercised, which leads her to humour the lad; and a sort of silly vanity, equally misplaced, she encourages him, if not in idleness, at least, in the hope that he will never need to stoop to incessant industry. It is not necessary to ascertain the absolute portion of idleness and pride that is infused into the young man; that depends [end of page #85] on particular circumstances: 72 but, in most cases, it is sufficient to prevent his following the footsteps of his father with equal energy.
Perhaps the capital, or the connections a father leaves in trade, may, in some degree, and for some time, compensate for this; but the instances where they do so are not numerous.
This is an example of the manner in which every succeeding generation is brought up differently from that preceding it; but it is an extreme example, and one that, though very real in the individuals, can never suddenly take place on a national scale.
The difference between the general affluence of a nation, and the change of its manners during the life of a man, is by no means equal to the difference between a remote province and the capital of an empire; but, though the example is extreme, the same effect is produced, in the course of several generations upon a nation, that was occasioned by change of place in one individual family from father to son. 73
When a change like this takes place in one family, (and there are numerous instances of it every day,) poverty comes on again, and the children fall back into the laborious class of society, probably in a degraded state; but as the evil is supplied by new people rising up, it is little felt on the nation; if, however, it occurs very generally, it must have a bad effect; and, indeed, the best thing that can happen for the
[end of page #86]
general welfare is, that such men may return to a state of insignificance and labour as fast as possible; for, while they remain above that, and in a declining state, they are filling their place in society badly.
It is different where the change goes on through a whole country, then no one can supply the place, they are all going the same way, and at nearly the same rate; 74 the consequence will be, that this will not be the fall of a family, but the fall of a whole people; the motion will, indeed, be much more slow, but the moving body will be vastly greater, and the effect will be in proportion.
In every nation in Europe there is, between the capital and the distant provinces, a difference of affluence, of wealth, &c. equal to what probably takes place in a nation in one or two centuries. The inhabitants of the capital have some great advantages over those that come from a distance; they have connections, they have money and stock; and, generally speaking, in their early years, they possess a more ready and marketable knowledge. But all these avail nothing against habits of industry, and being taught to expect nothing from others, but to depend all on one’s own powers. With this single, but signal, advantage, the sons of the wealthy citizens are always yielding to the son of the peasant; they are one by one giving way, and their places are filled by a new race; while their descendants are sinking into poverty, and filling prisons, poor-houses, and hospitals.
This vicissitude is so observable, that it would be unnecessary to dwell upon it were it, =sic= not of such infinite importance. 75
The alarming and lamentable increase of the poor, in proportion as
[end of page #87]
a nation becomes rich, is a proof that it is not in capital cities alone that the effect takes place, but over the whole of a country. 76
In England, the number of inhabitants is about six times the number of those in Scotland; and, perhaps, it costs twice as much to maintain a poor person in the former as in the latter. The sum necessary for the maintenance of the poor in England may then be reckoned at about twelve times as much as in Scotland, in order to preserve a just proportion between the two countries. But the poor cost more than sixty times as much in England as in Scotland; that is, at least five times more than the true proportion that ought to be!!!
This, it may be said, is owing to the different manner of managing the business, and, in some degree, it no doubt is; 77 but, as the poor are only maintained in England, and as they are also maintained in Scotland, it would be wrong to allow so great a difference for that alone.
In order, however, to put the matter out of all doubt, let us compare England with itself, and we shall find that the poor’s rates, or the expense of maintaining the indigent, has increased more rapidly than the price of provisions, or the price of labour. This ought not to be the case, as they would only have augmented in the same proportion, unless the number of poor was increased as well as the price of the provisions they eat, at the same time that the nation is growing more wealthy.
Of whom do the poor in every nation consist, but of the lame, the sick, the infirm, the aged, or children unprovided for? Of those, the number, in proportion to the total number of inhabitants, will be pretty nearly the same at all times; for it is nature that produces this species of helpless poverty. It would then appear that there is another species of poverty, not of nature’s creation, that comes in and destroys the proportion. It would likewise appear, that that new species of poverty
[end of page #88]
is occasioned by the general wealth, since it increases in proportion to it.
If we find, then, that the increase of wealth renders the descendants of a particular family helpless, and unable to maintain their place in society; if we find, also, that it gives those portions of a country, which are the least advanced, an advantage over those which are the most advanced; and, if we find that the number of indigent increase most where the wealth is greatest, we surely must allow, that there is a strong tendency to decay that accompanies the acquisition of wealth. The same revolutions that arise amongst the rich and poor inhabitants of a country, who change places gradually, and without noise, must naturally take place between the inhabitants of rich and poor countries, upon a larger scale and in a more permanent manner. 78 Such changes are generally attended with, or, at least, productive of, violent commotions. Nations are not subservient to laws like individuals, but make forcible use of the means of which they are possessed, to obtain the ends which they have in view.
As this tendency is uniformly felt by a number of individuals over the whole of a country, when it advances in wealth, and over whole districts that are more advanced than the others, it must operate, in length of time, in producing the decline of a whole nation, as well as it does of a certain portion of its people at all times.
Changes, in the interior of a nation, take place by piece-meal or by degrees; the whole mass sees nothing of it, and, indeed, it is not felt. 79 But it is vain to think, that the same cause that gives the poorer inhabitants of a nation an advantage over the richer, will not likewise
[end of page #89]
give poor nations an advantage over rich ones; or, at least, tend to raise the one and draw down the other. Though we find, from the history of the various revolutions that have taken place in different countries, that they arose from a variety of causes, some peculiar to one nation, and some to another; yet we have found a change of manners and ways of thinking and acting, more or less operating in all of them.
Amongst the interior causes of the decline of wealthy nations, arising from the wealth itself, we must set this down as one of a very general and natural operation. We must be particularly careful to remove this, as far as possible, if we mean to avert those evils which hitherto have arisen from a superior degree of wealth and power in every nation.
We are now going to examine other internal causes; but though they are separate from this, yet this is at the root of all, this is perpetually operating, we meet with it in every corner and at every turning. It is what Mr. Pope says, speaking of the master-passion in individuals:
“The great disease that must destroy at length,
Grows with our growth, and strengthens with our strength.”
This radical case of decline is augmented by an ill conceived vanity in the parents, as well as by necessity ceasing to act on the children. Each is following a very natural inclination; the one to indulge, the other to be indulged. It is the duty and the interest of the state to counteract this tendency, and the manner how that it is to be done will be inquired into in the first chapter of the third book of this work. =sic - there is none=
But it is not merely a neglect of industry and the means of rising in society, or keeping one’s place in it that is hurtful; the general way of thinking and acting becomes different, and, by degrees, the character of a nation is entirely altered. This change was the most rapid, and the most observable in the Roman republic, and was the cause that brought it to an end, and prepared the people for submitting to be ruled by the emperors. The human character was as much degraded under them, when the citizens were rich, as it ever had been exalted under their consular government, when the people were indigent. [end of page #90]
The various effects of this change in manners will be considered under different heads, but it is too deeply rooted in human nature ever to be entirely counteracted, much less entirely done away. It is firmly connected with the first principles of action in man, and can no more be removed than his entire nature can be altered. What is in the extreme, if dangerous, may be diminished; and that is all that it would be any way useful to attempt: it may be rendered less formidable in its operation, and that is all that can be expected.
The degradation of moral character; the loss of attention to the first principles to which a society owes its prosperity and safety, both of which accompany wealth, are most powerful agents in the decline of nations. We have seen that the Romans, the greatest of all nations, were ruined, chiefly, by degradation of character, by effeminacy, by ignorance; for we generally find that idleness degenerates, at last, into sloth and inaction. To a love of justice, and a power of overcoming danger, or of preventing it, listlessness and a total want of energy succeed: at length, the mind becomes estranged from hope, and the body incapable of exertion. This is the case with those who have for a time enjoyed luxury when they begin to decline; their fall is then inevitable. The Eastern empire, as well as the Western, fell by this means; and it may be said to have been the ordinary course in the decline of nations that have fallen gradually.
The Turks, 80 the Spaniards, and the Portuguese, all owe part of their present feebleness to this cause; and the government of France certainly, in a great measure, owed its downfal =sic= to the same. There the courtiers had sunk in character, and it was become impossible even for the energy, the activity, and intelligence of the nation at large, to counteract the baneful effect of the change that had taken place amongst those who regulated its affairs.
In history we have seen scarcely any thing similar to this, for it was the effect operating on the rulers of the nation only; the strength of the great body of the nation, on which it did not operate, supported that
[end of page #91]
pride and ignorance; whereas in Spain, Portugal, and Turkey, this evil being general throughout the state, those who have the conducting of affairs are held in some check by the general feebleness of the nation. 81 This not only limits the power of action, but is so visible, that it is impossible for those who govern not to be led to reflection, and to be taught moderation by it.
The power of laying on taxes and the means of defending itself against other nations are regulated by the situation of the people; but the wisdom with which the affairs are conducted is dependent on the rulers, and those who govern. It is therefore fortunate, when the rulers are so far sensible of the feeble state of the country as to be moderate and reasonable. 82
None of the nations that know their own weakness would ever have risked the experiment that was made on St. Domingo by the French; neither would any nation, in the vigour of acquiring riches, have done so. It required a nation, ruled by men who were ignorant of the true principles, who were corrupted with wealth, and, at the same time, had a vigorous nation to govern, to admit of such a situation of things. 83 Had the nation been less wealthy or weaker, so as to have made the poverty or weakness obvious, this could not have happened; or, had the rulers been less corrupted and ignorant, it could not have taken place. 84
[end of page #92]
In all the interior causes, for the decline of nations, which we are endeavouring to investigate, we shall find a change of manners, and ways of thinking, constantly producing some effect in the direction towards decline. This takes place, from the time that a nation becomes more wealthy than its neighbours; until then, when it is only struggling to equal them, a nation cannot be said to be rich, but to be emerging from poverty.
The great aim then should be, to counteract this change of mind and manners, that naturally attends an increased state of prosperity.
[end of page #93]
Notes
67 We have seen what became of the Romans, when the tribute paid by other nations enabled them to live in idleness. The influx of wealth from America produced nearly the same effect on Spain: though it lasted for a very short time, yet it ruined the country.
68 There are many instances where habit has rendered a particular sort of labour absolutely a want. It has become a necessary,— a means of enjoyment without which life has become a burthen.
69 It is perhaps amongst chances that seem likely enough; the only one that has never happened, that of a race of misers, in the same lineal descent, for several generations. The reason why I say it never has happened is, that, if it had, the effects would have become so conspicuous, by the riches accumulated, that they could not have passed unobserved.
70 By inaction is not meant the opposite of loco-motion, such as laying =sic= in bed, or basking in the sun; it is supposed that a man, to enjoy himself, must be reading, talking, in company, or doing something.
71 They sometimes affect this, but it is little else than through vanity. It would be easy to give a hundred striking proofs, but their frequency renders that unnecessary.
72 If the mother has been herself born in affluence, she generally has a sort of smothered contempt for the mean origin of her husband. She seldom is fully sensible of the merit by which he has raised himself, and consequently cannot be capable of appreciating the advantage of bringing up her boy in the same way; on the contrary, the habits of industry, which the father acquired at an early age, under the pressure of necessity, are generally secret objects of ridicule to the rest of the family. If, again, the woman has been of low origin in herself, and is become affluent, then matters are ten times worse. Then there is all the pride and vanity that ignorance, and a desire to hide that mean extraction create. Incapable of shewing delicacy and fine breeding in herself, she spoils her harmless children by converting them into specimens of the gentility of the family. For more of this, see the chapter on Education.
73 In Rome, after the taking of Carthage; and in Portugal, immediately after it got possession of the trade to India; the change must have been as great over the whole of the people in one generation, as it is generally between a remote province and near the capital.
74 It is always to be observed, that this reasoning is only applicable in general, and not in every particular case. It has been remarked by the writer of the notes on the Wealth of Nations, that where a fortune is not realized in a family, sufficient to enable it to withdraw entirely from trade, it seldom remains wealthy above two generations. The sons most frequently want intelligence or industry to augment what their father got, and the grandsons have generally dissipation enough to squander entirely away what remains. This is so frequent a case in London, that it may be called the regular routine of the business; and, what arises by regular routine, must be derived from some general and natural cause.
75 In the chapter on Education, this subject is entered into more fully, and the education of women makes a principal part. A subject not noticed by the author of the Wealth of Nations, though very important.
76 The Poor’s Rate, and regulations respecting that augmenting class of persons, are treated in a chapter by itself.
77 For this see the chapter on the Poor, in which the subject is investigated at considerable length. At present, it is only mentioned by way of illustrating the effect of wealth on the manners of the people; and to prove, that it is not confined to the capital alone, but is general all over the country of England.
78 As we find that wealth seldom goes amongst people of business past the second, and almost never past the third generation, families that rise so high as to be partners in profit, and not in labour or attention, are an exception. Nations resemble the families that acquire enough to be affluent, but not enough to retire from business. A nation can never retire; it must always be industrious. The inference is clear and cannot be mistaken; neither can the fact stated be denied.
79 The number of bankruptcies have been considered as signs of wealth; and their increase is a sign most undoubtedly of more trade; but this is a barometer, of which it requires some skill to understand the real index.
80 Those nations resemble each other in feebleness, and in the cause of it, though, with respect to the Turks, it has existed for a longer period.
81 The French nation, in reality, was never so powerful and wealthy as at the time of the revolution breaking out. The effects of luxury had only perverted the city of Paris and the court. The power which the energies of the people at large put at the disposition of the government was ill applied.
82 Perhaps some of the greatest advantages that arise from a form of government like that of England are, that those who have ruled, owe their places to their abilities, and not to favour; that they maintain their situations by exertion, and not by flattery; and that the situation of the nation never can be long disguised. Without the turbulence of a democracy, we have most of the advantages that arise from one, while we have, at the same time, the benefits that proceed from the stability and order of established monarchy.
83 When the Portuguese were for abandoning the India trade, it was a case pretty similar.
84 Though the men who overturned the commerce of France were not the same with the members of the ancient government, yet they also were men ignorant of the true interests of the nation. A few amongst them were bent upon an experiment, regardless of the ruin with which it might be attended.
← Back to The Decline and Fall of Powerful and Wealthy Nations