ductive agency； a permanent basis of cultivation and labor。
But he who lends his services；what is his basis of cultivation？
The proprietor's presumed need of him； and the unwarranted supposition that he wishes to employ him。 Just as the commoner once held his land by the munificence and condescension of the lord； so to…day the working…man holds his labor by the condescension and necessities of the master and proprietor： that is what is called possession by a precarious＇1＇ title。 But this precarious condition is an injustice； for it implies an inequality in the bargain。 The laborer's wages exceed but little his running expenses； and do not assure him wages for to…morrow； while the capitalist finds in the instrument produced by the laborer a pledge of independence and security for the future。
＇1＇ Precarious； from precor； 〃I pray；〃 because the act of concession expressly signified that the lord； in answer to the prayers of his men or slaves； had granted them permission to labor。
Now； this reproductive leaventhis eternal germ of life； this preparation of the land and manufacture of implements for productionconstitutes the debt of the capitalist to the producer； which he never pays； and it is this fraudulent denial which causes the poverty of the laborer； the luxury of idleness； and the inequality of conditions。 This it is； above all other things； which has been so fitly named the exploitation of man by man。
One of three things must be done。 Either the laborer must be given a portion of the product in addition to his wages； or the employer must render the laborer an equivalent in productive service； or else he must pledge himself to employ him for ever。 Division of the product； reciprocity of service； or guarantee of perpetual labor；from the adoption of one of these courses the capitalist cannot escape。 But it is evident that he cannot satisfy the second and third of these conditionshe can neither put himself at the service of the thousands of working…men； who； directly or indirectly； have aided him in establishing himself； nor employ them all for ever。 He has no other course left him； then； but a division of the property。 But if the property is divided； all conditions will be equalthere will be no more large capitalists or large proprietors。
Consequently； when M。 Ch。 Comtefollowing out his hypothesis shows us his capitalist acquiring one after another the products of his employees' labor； he sinks deeper and deeper into the mire； and； as his argument does not change； our reply of course remains the same。
〃Other laborers are employed in building： some quarry the stone； others transport it； others cut it； and still others put it in place。 Each of them adds a certain value to the material which passes through his hands； and this value； the product of his labor； is his property。 He sells it； as fast as he creates it； to the proprietor of the building； who pays him for it in food and wages。〃
_Divide et impera_divide； and you shall command； divide； and you shall grow rich； divide； and you shall deceive men； you shall daze their minds； you shall mock at justice！ Separate laborers from each other； perhaps each one's daily wage exceeds the value of each individual's product； but that is not the question under consideration。 A force of one thousand men working twenty days has been paid the same wages that one would be paid for working fifty…five years； but this force of one thousand has done in twenty days what a single man could not have accomplished； though he had labored for a million centuries。 Is the exchange an equitable one？ Once more； no； when you have paid all the individual forces； the collective force still remains to be paid。
Consequently； there remains always a right of collective property which you have not acquired； and which you enjoy unjustly。
Admit that twenty days' wages suffice to feed； lodge； and clothe this multitude for twenty days： thrown out of employment at the end of that time； what will become of them； if； as fast as they create； they abandon their creations to the proprietors who will soon discharge them？ While the proprietor； firm in his position （thanks to the aid of all the laborers）； dwells in security； and fears no lack of labor or bread； the laborer's only dependence is upon the benevolence of this same proprietor； to whom he has sold and surrendered his liberty。 If； then； the proprietor； shielding himself behind his comfort and his rights； refuses to employ the laborer； how can the laborer live？ He has ploughed an excellent field； and cannot sow it； he has built an elegant and commodious house； and cannot live in it； he has produced all； and can enjoy nothing
Labor leads us to equality。 Every step that we take brings us nearer to it； and if laborers had equal strength； diligence； and industry； clearly their fortunes would be equal also。 Indeed； if； as is pretended；and as we have admitted；the laborer is proprietor of the value which he creates； it follows：
1。 That the laborer acquires at the expense of the idle proprietor；
2。 That all production being necessarily collective； the laborer is entitled to a share of the products and profits commensurate with his labor；
3。 That all accumulated capital being social property； no one can be its exclusive proprietor。
These inferences are unavoidable； these alone would suffice to revolutionize our whole economical system； and change our institutions and our laws。 Why do the very persons； who laid down this principle； now refuse to be guided by it？ Why do the Says； the Comtes； the Hennequins； and othersafter having said that property is born of laborseek to fix it by occupation and prescription？
But let us leave these sophists to their contradictions and blindness。 The good sense of the people will do justice to their equivocations。 Let us make haste to enlighten it； and show it the true path。 Equality approaches； already between it and us but a short distance intervenes： to…morrow even this distance will have been traversed。
％ 6。That in Society all Wages are Equal。
When the St。 Simonians； the Fourierists； and； in general； all who in our day are connected with social economy and reform； inscribe upon their banner；
〃TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS CAPACITY； TO EACH CAPACITY ACCORDING TO ITS RESULTS〃 （St。 Simon）；
〃TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS CAPITAL； HIS LABOR； AND HIS SKILL〃 （Fourier）；
they meanalthough they do not say so in so many wordsthat the products of Nature procured by labor and industry are a reward； a palm； a crown offered to all kinds of preeminence and superiority。 They regard the land as an immense arena in which prizes are contended for；no longer； it is true； with lances and swords； by force and by treachery； but by acquired wealth； by knowledge； talent； and by virtue itself。 In a word； they mean and everybody agrees with themthat the greatest capacity is entitled to the greatest reward； and； to use the mercantile phraseology；which has； at least； the merit of being straightforward；that salaries must be governed by capacity and its results。
The disciples of these two self…styled reformers cannot deny that such is their thought； for； in doing so； they would contradict their official interpretations； and would destroy the unity of their systems。 Furthermore； such a denial on their part is not to be feared。 The two sects glory in laying down as a principle inequality of conditions；reasoning from Nature； who； they say； intended the inequality of capacities。 They boast only of one thing； namely； that their political system is so perfect； that the social inequalities always correspond with the natural inequalities。 They no more trouble themselves to inquire whether inequality of conditionsI mean of salariesis possible； than they do to fix a measure of capacity。＇1＇
＇1＇ In St。 Simon's system； the St。…Simonian priest determines the capacity of each by virtue of his pontifical infallibility； in imitation of the Roman Church： in Fourier's； the ranks and merits are decided by vote； in imitation of the constitutional regime。
Clearly； the great man is an object of ridicule to the reader； he did not mean to tell his secret。
〃To each according to his capacity； to each capacity according to its results。〃
〃To each according to his capital； his labor； and his skill。〃
Since the death of St。 Simon and Fourier； not one among their numerous disciples has attempted to give to the public a scientific demonstration of this grand maxim； and I would wager a hundred to one that no Fourierist even suspects that this biform aphorism is susceptible of two interpretations。
〃To each according to his capacity； to each capacity according to its results。〃
〃To each according to his capital； his labor； and his skill。〃
This proposition； taken； as they say； _in sensu obvio_in the sense usually attributed to itis false； absurd； unjust； contradictory； hostile to liberty； friendly to tyranny； anti… social； and was unluckily framed under the express influence of the property idea。
And； first； CAPITAL must be crossed off the list of elements which are entitled to a reward。 The Fourieristsas far as I have been able to learn from a few of their pamphletsdeny the right of occupancy； and recognize no basis of property save labor。 Starting with a like premise； they would have seenhad they reasoned upon the matterthat capital is a source of production to its proprietor only by virtue of the right of occupancy； and that this production is therefore illegitimate。 Indeed； if labor is the sole basis of property； I cease to be proprietor of my field as soon as I receive rent for it from another。 This we have shown beyond all cavil。 It is the same with all capital； so that to put capital in an enterprise； is； by the law's decision； to exchange it for an equivalent sum in products。 I will not enter again upon this now useless discussion； since I propose； in the following chapter； to exhaust the subject of PRODUCTION BY CAPITAL。
Thus； capital can be exchanged； but cannot be a source of income。
LABOR and SKILL remain； or； as St。 Simon puts it； RESULTS and CAPACITIES。 I will examine them successively。
Should wages be governed by labor？ In other words； is it just that he who