body　and　hoof；　for　consuming；　and　trampling　down。　For　which　sin
  Ixion　is　at　last　bound　upon　a　wheel　　fiery　and　toothed；　and
  rolling　perpetually　in　the　air：　　the　type　of　human　labour　when
  selfish　and　fruitless　（kept　far　into　the　Middle　Ages　in　their
  wheels　of　fortune）；　the　wheel　which　has　in　it　no　breath　or
  spirit；　but　is　whirled　by　chance　only；　whereas　of　all　true　work
  the　Ezekiel　vision　is　true；　that　the　Spirit　of　the　living
  creature　is　in　the　wheels；　and　where　the　angels　go；　the　wheels　go
  by　them；　but　move　no　otherwise。
  This　being　the　real　nature　of　capital；　it　follows　that　there
  are　two　kinds　of　true　production；　always　going　on　in　an　active
  State：　one　of　seed；　and　one　of　food；　or　production　for　the
  Ground；　and　for　the　Mouth；　both　of　which　are　by　covetous　persons
  thought　to　be　production　only　for　the　granary；　whereas　the
  function　of　the　granary　is　but　intermediate　and　conservative；
  fulfilled　in　distribution；　else　it　ends　in　nothing　but　mildew；
  and　nourishment　of　rats　and　worms。　And　since　production　for　the
  Ground　is　only　useful　with　future　hope　of　harvest；　all　essential
  production　is　for　the　Mouth；　and　is　finally　measured　by　the
  mouth；　hence；　as　I　said　above；　consumption　is　the　crown　of
  production；　and　the　wealth　of　a　nation　is　only　to　be　estimated　by
  what　it　consumes。
  The　want　of　any　clear　sight　of　this　fact　is　the　capital
  error；　issuing　in　rich　interest　and　revenue　of　error　among　the
  political　economists。　Their　minds　are　continually　set　on
  money…gain；　not　on　mouth…gain；　and　they　fall　into　every　sort　of
  net　and　snare；　dazzled　by　the　coin…glitter　as　birds　by　the
  fowler's　glass；　or　rather　（for　there　is　not　much　else　like　birds
  in　them）　they　are　like　children　trying　to　jump　on　the　heads　of
  their　own　shadows；　the　money…gain　being　only　the　shadow　of　the
  true　gain；　which　is　humanity。
  The　final　object　of　political　economy；　therefore；　is　to　get
  good　method　of　consumption；　and　great　quantity　of　consumption：　in
  other　words；　to　use　everything；　and　to　use　it　nobly。　whether　it
  be　substance；　service；　or　service　perfecting　substance。　The　most
  curious　error　in　Mr　Mill's　entire　work；　（provided　for　him
  originally　by　Ricardo；）　is　his　endeavour　to　distinguish　between
  direct　and　indirect　service；　and　consequent　assertion　that　a
  demand　for　commodities　is　not　demand　for　labour　（I。　v。　9；　et
  seq。）。　He　distinguishes　between　labourers　employed　to　lay　out
  pleasure　grounds；　and　to　manufacture　velvet；　declaring　that　it
  makes　material　difference　to　the　labouring　classes　in　which　of
  these　two　ways　a　capitalist　spends　his　money；　because　the
  employment　of　the　gardeners　is　a　demand　for　labour；　but　the
  purchase　of　velvet　is　not。（29*）　Error　colossal；　as　well　as
  strange。　It　will；　indeed；　make　a　difference　to　the　labourer
  whether　we　bid　him　swing　his　scythe　in　the　spring　winds；　or　drive
  the　loom　in　pestilential　air。　but；　so　far　as　his　pocket　is
  concerned；　it　makes；　to　him　absolutely　no　difference　whether　we
  order　him　to　make　green　velvet；　with　seed　and　a　scythe；　or　red
  velvet；　with　silk　and　scissors。　Neither　does　it　anywise　concern
  him　whether；　when　the　velvet　is　made；　we　consume　it　by　walking　on
  it；　or　wearing　it；　so　long　as　our　consumption　of　it　is　wholly
  selfish。　But　if　our　consumption　is　to　be　in　anywise　unselfish；
  not　only　our　mode　of　consuming　the　articles　we　require　interests
  him；　but　also　the　kind　of　article　we　require　with　a　view　to
  consumption。　As　thus　（returning　for　a　moment　to　Mr　Mill's　great
  hardware　theory（30*））：　it　matters；　so　far　as　the　labourer's
  immediate　profit　is　concerned；　not　an　iron　filing　whether　I
  employ　him　in　growing　a　peach；　or　forging　a　bombshell；　but　my
  probable　mode　of　consumption　of　those　articles　matters　seriously。
  Admit　that　it　is　to　be　in　both　cases　〃unselfish；〃　and　the
  difference；　to　him；　is　final；　whether　when　his　child　is　ill；　I
  walk　into　his　cottage　and　give　it　the　peach；　or　drop　the　shell
  down　his　chimney；　and　blow　his　roof　off。
  The　worst　of　it；　for　the　peasant；　is；　that　the　capitalist's
  consumption　of　the　peach　is　apt　to　be　selfish；　and　of　the　shell；
  distributive；（31*）　but；　in　all　cases；　this　is　the　broad　and
  general　fact；　that　on　due　catallactic　commercial　principles；
  somebody's　roof　must　go　off　in　fulfilment　of　the　bomb's　destiny。
  You　may　grow　for　your　neighbour；　at　your　liking；　grapes　or
  grape…shot；　he　will　also；　catallactically；　grow　grapes　or
  grape…shot　for　you；　and　you　will　each　reap　what　you　have　sown。
  It　is；　therefore；　the　manner　and　issue　of　consumption　which
  are　the　real　tests　of　production。　Production　does　not　consist　in
  things　laboriously　made；　but　in　things　serviceably　consumable；
  and　the　question　for　the　nation　is　not　how　much　labour　it
  employs；　but　how　much　life　it　produces。　For　as　consumption　is　the
  end　and　aim　of　production；　so　life　is　the　end　and　aim　of
  consumption。
  I　left　this　question　to　the　reader's　thought　two　months　ago；
  choosing　rather　that　he　should　work　it　out　for　himself　than　have
  it　sharply　stated　to　him。　But　now；　the　ground　being　sufficiently
  broken　（and　the　details　into　which　the　several　questions；　here
  opened；　must　lead　us；　being　too　complex　for　discussion　in　the
  pages　of　a　periodical；　so　that　I　must　pursue　them　elsewhere）；　I
  desire；　in　closing　the　series　of　introductory　papers；　to　leave
  this　one　great　fact　clearly　stated。　THERE　IS　NO　WEALTH　BUT　LIFE。
  Life；　including　all　its　powers　of　love；　of　joy；　and　of
  admiration。　That　country　is　the　richest　which　nourishes　the
  greatest　number　of　noble　and　happy　human　beings；　that　man　is
  richest　who；　having　perfected　the　functions　of　his　own　life　to
  the　utmost；　has　also　the　widest　helpful　influence；　both　personal；
  and　by　means　of　his　possessions；　over　the　lives　of　others。
  A　strange　political　economy；　the　only　one；　nevertheless；　that
  ever　was　or　can　be：　all　political　economy　founded　on
  self…interest（32*）　being　but　the　fulfilment　of　that　which　once
  brought　schism　into　the　Policy　of　angels；　and　ruin　into　the
  Economy　of　Heaven。
  〃The　greatest　number　of　human　beings　noble　and　happy。〃　But　is
  the　nobleness　consistent　with　the　number？　Yes；　not　only
  consistent　with　it；　but　essential　to　it。　The　maximum　of　life　can
  only　be　reached　by　the　maximum　of　virtue。　In　this　respect　the　law
  of　human　population　differs　wholly　from　that　of　animal　life。　The
  multiplication　of　animals　is　checked　only　by　want　of　food；　and　by
  the　hostility　of　races；　the　population　of　the　gnat　is　restrained
  by　the　hunger　of　the　swallow；　and　that　of　the　swallow　by　the
  scarcity　of　gnats。　Man；　considered　as　an　animal；　is　indeed
  limited　by　the　same　laws：　hunger；　or　plague；　or　war；　are　the
  necessary　and　only　restraints　upon　his　increase；　　effectual
  restraints　hitherto；　　his　principal　study　having　been　how　most
  swiftly　to　destroy　himself；　or　ravage　his　dwelling…places；　and
  his　highest　skill　directed　to　give　range　to　the　famine；　seed　to
  the　plague；　and　sway　to　the　sword。　But；　considered　as　other　than
  an　animal；　his　increase　is　not　limited　by　these　laws。　It　is
  limited　only　by　the　limits　of　his　courage　and　his　love。　Both　of
  these　have　their　bounds；　and　ought　to　have；　his　race　has　its
  bounds　also；　but　these　have　not　yet　been　reached；　nor　will　be
  reached　for　ages。
  In　all　the　ranges　of　human　thought　I　know　none　so　melancholy
  as　the　speculations　of　political　economists　on　the　population
  question。　It　is　proposed　to　better　the　condition　of　the　labourer
  by　giving　him　higher　wages。　〃Nay；〃　says　the　economist；　　〃if　you
  raise　his　wages；　he　will　either　people　down　to　the　same　point　of
  misery　at　which　you　found　him；　or　drink　your　wages　away。〃　He
  will。　I　know　it。　Who　gave　him　this　will？　Suppose　it　were　your　own
  son　of　whom　you　spoke；　declaring　to　me　that　you　dared　not　take
  him　into　your　firm；　nor　even　give　him　his　just　labourer's　wages；
  because　if　you　did　he　would　die　of　drunkenness；　and　leave　half　a
  score　of　children　to　the　parish。　〃Who　gave　your　son　these
  dispositions？〃　　I　should　enquire。　Has　he　them　by　inheritance　or
  by　education？　By　one　or　other　they　must　come；　and　as　in　him；　so
  also　in　the　poor。　Either　these　poor　are　of　a　race　essentially
  different　from　ours；　and　unredeemable　（which；　however；　often
  implied；　I　have　heard　none　yet　openly　say）；　or　else　by　such　care
  as　we　have　ourselves　received；　we　may　make　them　continent　and
  sober　as　ourselves…wise　and　dispassionate　as　we　are　models
  arduous　of　imitation。　〃But；〃　it　is　answered；　〃they　cannot　receive