DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.22140#0215
THE ECONOMIC DOCTRINE OF WASTE.
199
as the supervision are economical waste. Perhaps the fact that
the duration of the best among these substitutes has but a limited-
existence is a powerful stimulant to invention and improvement.
The value of machinery, buildings, &c, in the assets of a trader
or manufacturer, is, or should always be, annually lessened by a
sinking fund, and the life of the instrument should be recognized
to be brief. There is inevitable waste in a metallic currency. At
times, as in 1562 and 1698, this waste has brought about a finan-
cial crisis. Now it is the business of the private producer, and
the business of an intelligent government, to anticipate and inter-
pret as far as possible inevitable waste, and as far as each can, to
reduce or narrow the amount. Invention and improvement have
done this to a remarkable degree in private enterprise. I am
afraid that I cannot bestow the same commendation on all the acts-
of any administration, whatever its complexion has been.
There is another direction in which physical, and especially
chemical, research has obviated waste. You have, no doubt, often
heard of these processes, of how the cost of materials in familiar
use has been amazingly reduced, of how bye-products in particular
industries, as, for example, in the manufacture of coal gas, and in
the purification of rock salt, have been turned from being mere
waste into valuable economical products. Similar inventions
have attended the art of agriculture, the art of navigation, and a
thousand other sciences. As I told you at the beginning of these
lectures, we know that there is a limit beyond which human
invention and adaptation cannot go; but there is no knowledge of
what that limit is, and what are the victories still reserved for
scientific research.
Is the rent of land, that is, toll taken for the user of the soil,,
and the license charge for exercising agricultural skill, apart from
the outlay of the owner, waste ? My hypothesis, you will see,
assumes that the legal owner contributes nothing to the mechanism
of industry, that he simply extracts from the demand of the
occupier as much of increased value from outlay, as is in excess
of replaced capital, personal maintenance, and reasonable profits.
The problem must be faced, for it is of no avail to meet sceptics
by simply asserting the right of property in a natural but limited
agent or instrument. Now I think the economist must admit
199
as the supervision are economical waste. Perhaps the fact that
the duration of the best among these substitutes has but a limited-
existence is a powerful stimulant to invention and improvement.
The value of machinery, buildings, &c, in the assets of a trader
or manufacturer, is, or should always be, annually lessened by a
sinking fund, and the life of the instrument should be recognized
to be brief. There is inevitable waste in a metallic currency. At
times, as in 1562 and 1698, this waste has brought about a finan-
cial crisis. Now it is the business of the private producer, and
the business of an intelligent government, to anticipate and inter-
pret as far as possible inevitable waste, and as far as each can, to
reduce or narrow the amount. Invention and improvement have
done this to a remarkable degree in private enterprise. I am
afraid that I cannot bestow the same commendation on all the acts-
of any administration, whatever its complexion has been.
There is another direction in which physical, and especially
chemical, research has obviated waste. You have, no doubt, often
heard of these processes, of how the cost of materials in familiar
use has been amazingly reduced, of how bye-products in particular
industries, as, for example, in the manufacture of coal gas, and in
the purification of rock salt, have been turned from being mere
waste into valuable economical products. Similar inventions
have attended the art of agriculture, the art of navigation, and a
thousand other sciences. As I told you at the beginning of these
lectures, we know that there is a limit beyond which human
invention and adaptation cannot go; but there is no knowledge of
what that limit is, and what are the victories still reserved for
scientific research.
Is the rent of land, that is, toll taken for the user of the soil,,
and the license charge for exercising agricultural skill, apart from
the outlay of the owner, waste ? My hypothesis, you will see,
assumes that the legal owner contributes nothing to the mechanism
of industry, that he simply extracts from the demand of the
occupier as much of increased value from outlay, as is in excess
of replaced capital, personal maintenance, and reasonable profits.
The problem must be faced, for it is of no avail to meet sceptics
by simply asserting the right of property in a natural but limited
agent or instrument. Now I think the economist must admit