Economic Sophisms/225

213 evening four baskets of game, if you would give me in exchange two baskets of vegetables.'

"At these words Robinson and Friday retired to consult, and the argument that passed is too interesting not to be reported in extenso. ": What do you think of it? ": If we close with the proposal, we are ruined. "F.: Are you sure of that? Let us consider.

"R.: The case is clear. Crushed by competition, our hunting as a branch of industry is annihilated.

"F.: What matters it, if we have the game?

"R.: Theory! it will no longer be the product of our labour.

"F.: I beg your pardon, sir; for in order to have game we must part with vegetables.

"R.: Then, what shall we gain?

"F.: The four baskets of game cost us six hours' work. The foreigner gives us them in exchange for two baskets of vegetables, which cost us only three hours' work. This places three hours at our disposal.

"R.: Say, rather, which aRe substractedsubtracted [sic] from our exertions. In this will consist our loss. Lahour is wealth, and if we lose a fourth part of our time, we shall be less rich by a fourth.

"F.: You are greatly mistaken, my good friend. We shall have as much game, and the same quantity of vegetables, and three hours at our disposal into the bargain. This is progress, or there is no such thing in the world.

"R.: You lose yourself in generalities! What should we make of these three hours? "F.: We would do something else.

"R.: Ah! I understand you. You cannot come to particulars. Something else, something else—this is easily said.

"F.: We can fish, we can ornament our cottage, we can read the Bible.

"R.: Utopia ! Is there any certainty that we should do either the one or the other? "F.: Very well, if we have no wants to satisfy we can rest. Is repose nothing? "R.: But while we repose we may die of hunger.

"F.: My dear friend, you have got into a vicious circle. I