vow boldly that in my eyes it would have been the first of rights； and the holiest of duties； and all that I desire to…day is that my profession of faith be understood。
Society devours itself；1。 By the violent and periodical sacrifice of laborers： this we have just seen； and shall see again； 2。 By the stoppage of the producer's consumption caused by property。 These two modes of suicide are at first simultaneous； but soon the first is given additional force by the second； famine uniting with usury to render labor at once more necessary and more scarce。
By the principles of commerce and political economy； that an industrial enterprise may be successful； its product must furnish；1。 The interest on the capital employed； 2。 Means for the preservation of this capital； 3。 The wages of all the employees and contractors。 Further； as large a profit as possible must be realized。
The financial shrewdness and rapacity of property is worthy of admiration。 Each different name which increase takes affords the proprietor an opportunity to receive it；1。 In the form of interest； 2。 In the form of profit。 For； it says； a part of the income derived from manufactures consists of interest on the capital employed。 If one hundred thousand francs have been invested in a manufacturing enterprise； and in a year's time five thousand francs have been received therefrom in addition to the expenses； there has been no profit； but only interest on the capital。 Now； the proprietor is not a man to labor for nothing。 Like the lion in the fable； he gets paid in each of his capacities； so that； after he has been served； nothing is left for his associates。
_Ego primam tollo； nominor quia leo。 Secundam quia sum fortis tribuctis mihi。 Tum quia plus valeo； me sequetur tertia。 Malo adficietur； si quis quartam tetigerit。_
I know nothing prettier than this fable。
〃I am the contractor。 I take the first share。 I am the laborer； I take the second。 I am the capitalist； I take the third。 I am the proprietor； I take the whole。〃
In four lines； Phaedrus has summed up all the forms of property。
I say that this interest； all the more then this profit； is impossible。
What are laborers in relation to each other？ So many members of a large industrial society； to each of whom is assigned a certain portion of the general production； by the principle of the division of labor and functions。 Suppose； first； that this society is composed of but three individuals； a cattle…raiser； a tanner； and a shoemaker。 The social industry； then； is that of shoemaking。 If I should ask what ought to be each producer's share of the social product； the first schoolboy whom I should meet would answer； by a rule of commerce and association； that it should be one…third。 But it is not our duty here to balance the rights of laborers conventionally associated： we have to prove that； whether associated or not； our three workers are obliged to act as if they were； that； whether they will or no； they are associated by the force of things； by mathematical necessity。
Three processes are required in the manufacture of shoes；the rearing of cattle； the preparation of their hides； and the cutting and sewing。 If the hide； on leaving the farmer's stable； is worth one； it is worth two on leaving the tanner's pit； and three on leaving the shoemaker's shop。 Each laborer has produced a portion of the utility； so that； by adding all these portions together； we get the value of the article。 To obtain any quantity whatever of this article； each producer must pay； then； first for his own labor； and second for the labor of the other producers。 Thus； to obtain as many shoes as can be made from ten hides； the farmer will give thirty raw hides； and the tanner twenty tanned hides。 For； the shoes that are made from ten hides are worth thirty raw hides； in consequence of the extra labor bestowed upon them； just as twenty tanned hides are worth thirty raw hides； on account of the tanner's labor。 But if the shoemaker demands thirty…three in the farmer's product； or twenty…two in the tanner's； for ten in his own； there will be no exchange； for； if there were； the farmer and the tanner； after having paid the shoemaker ten for his labor； would have to pay eleven for that which they had themselves sold for ten；which； of course； would be impossible。＇1＇
＇1＇ There is an error in the author's calculation here； but the translator； feeling sure that the reader will understand Proudhon's meaning； prefers not to alter his figures。 Translator。
Well； this is precisely what happens whenever an emolument of any kind is received； be it called revenue； farm…rent； interest； or profit。 In the little community of which we are speaking； if the shoemakerin order to procure tools； buy a stock of leather； and support himself until he receives something from his investment borrows money at interest； it is clear that to pay this interest he will have to make a profit off the tanner and the farmer。 But as this profit is impossible unless fraud is used； the interest will fall back upon the shoulders of the unfortunate shoemaker； and ruin him。
I have imagined a case of unnatural simplicity。 There is no human society but sustains more than three vocations。 The most uncivilized society supports numerous industries； to…day； the number of industrial functions （I mean by industrial functions all useful functions） exceeds； perhaps； a thousand。 However numerous the occupations； the economic law remains the same； THAT THE PRODUCER MAY LIVE； HIS WAGES MUST REPURCHASE HIS PRODUCT。
_ _The economists cannot be ignorant of this rudimentary principle of their pretended science： why； then； do they so obstinately defend property； and inequality of wages； and the legitimacy of usury； and the honesty of profit；all of which contradict the economic law； and make exchange impossible？ A contractor pays one hundred thousand francs for raw material； fifty thousand francs in wages； and then expects to receive a product of two hundred thousand francs；that is； expects to make a profit on the material and on the labor of his employees； but if the laborers and the purveyor of the material cannot； with their combined wages； repurchase that which they have produced for the contractor； how can they live？ I will develop my question。 Here details become necessary。
If the workingman receives for his labor an average of three francs per day； his employer （in order to gain any thing beyond his own salary； if only interest on his capital） must sell the day's labor of his employee； in the form of merchandise； for more than three francs。 The workingman cannot； then； repurchase that which he has produced for his master。 It is thus with all trades whatsoever。 The tailor； the hatter； the cabinet…maker； the blacksmith； the tanner； the mason； the jeweller； the printer； the clerk； &c。； even to the farmer and wine…grower； cannot repurchase their products； since； producing for a master who in one form or another makes a profit； they are obliged to pay more for their own labor than they get for it。
In France； twenty millions of laborers； engaged in all the branches of science； art； and industry； produce every thing which is useful to man。 Their annual wages amount； it is estimated。 to twenty thousand millions； but； in consequence of the right of property； and the multifarious forms of increase； premiums； tithes； interests； fines； profits； farm…rents； house…rents； revenues； emoluments of every nature and description； their products are estimated by the proprietors and employers at twenty…five thousand millions。 What does that signify？ That the laborers； who are obliged to repurchase these products in order to live； must either pay five for that which they produced for four； or fast one day in five。
If there is an economist in France able to show that this calculation is false； I summon him to appear； and I promise to retract all that I have wrongfully and wickedly uttered in my attacks upon property。
Let us now look at the results of this profit。
If the wages of the workingmen were the same in all pursuits； the deficit caused by the proprietor's tax would be felt equally everywhere； but also the cause of the evil would be so apparent； that it would soon be discovered and suppressed。 But； as there is the same inequality of wages （from that of the scavenger up to that of the minister of state） as of property； robbery continually rebounds from the stronger to the weaker； so that； since the laborer finds his hardships increase as he descends in the social scale； the lowest class of people are literally stripped naked and eaten alive by the others。
The laboring people can buy neither the cloth which they weave； nor the furniture which they manufacture； nor the metal which they forge； nor the jewels which they cut； nor the prints which they engrave。 They can procure neither the wheat which they plant； nor the wine which they grow； nor the flesh of the animals which they raise。 They are allowed neither to dwell in the houses which they build； nor to attend the plays which their labor supports； nor to enjoy the rest which their body requires。 And why？ Because the right of increase does not permit these things to be sold at the cost…price； which is all that laborers can afford to pay。 On the signs of those magnificent warehouses which he in his poverty admires； the laborer reads in large letters： 〃This is thy work； and thou shalt not have it。〃 _Sic vos non vobis_！
Every manufacturer who employs one thousand laborers； and gains from them daily one sou each； is slowly pushing them into a state of misery。 Every man who makes a profit has entered into a conspiracy with famine。 But the whole nation has not even this labor； by means of which property starves it。 And why？ Because the workers are forced by the insufficiency of their wages to monopolize labor； and because； before being destroyed by dearth； they destroy each other by competition。 Let us pursue this truth no further。
If the laborer's wages will not purchase his product； it follows that the product is not made for the producer。 For whom； then； is it intended？ For the richer consumer