_4to._ Some _political_ inconveniencies of _luxury_ have been already pointed out. The extinction of foreign trade is the most striking. But the loss of trade, conveys no ideas of any _moral_, _physical_, or _domestic excess_; and still it is vicious in so far as it affects the well-being of a state. Besides this particular evil, I very willingly agree, that in as far as the good government of a state depends upon the application and capacity, as well as the integrity of those who sit at the helm, or who are employed in the administration, or direction of public affairs, in so far may the moral inconveniencies of _luxury_ mentioned above, affect the prosperity of a state. The consequences of _excessive luxury_, _moral_ and _physical_, as well as the dissipation of private fortunes, may render both the statesman, and those whom he employs, negligent in their duty, unfit to discharge it, rapacious and corrupt. These may, indirectly, be reckoned among the _political_ evils attending _luxury_, in so far as they take place. But on the other hand, as they cannot be called the _necessary effects_ of the _cause_ to which they are here ascribed, that is, to _moral_, _physical_, and _domestic luxury_, I do not think they can with propriety be implied in the definition of the term. They are rather to be attributed to the imperfection of the human mind, than to any other second cause, which might occasionally contribute to their production. They may proceed from _avarice_, as well as from _prodigality_. I hope this short exposition of a matter, not absolutely falling within the limits of my subject, will suffice to prove that my definition of _luxury_, describes at least the most essential requisite towards determining it: _the providing of superfluity with a view to consumption_. This is inseparable from our ideas of _luxury_; but vicious _excess_ certainly is not. A sober man may have a most delicate table, as well as a glutton; and a virtuous man may enjoy the pleasures of love and ease with as much sensuality as Heliogabalus. But no man can become luxurious, in our acceptation of the word, without giving bread to the industrious, without encouraging emulation, industry, and agriculture; and without producing the circulation of an adequate equivalent for every service. This last is the palladium of liberty, the fountain of gentle dependence, and the agreeable band of union among free societies. Let me therefore conclude my chapter, with a metaphysical observation. The use of words, is to express ideas; the more simple any idea is, the more easy it is to convey it by a word. Whenever, therefore, language furnishes several words, which are called _synonimous_, we may conclude, that the idea conveyed by them is not simple. On every such occasion, it is doing a service to learning, to render them as little synonimous as possible, and to point out the particular differences between the ideas they convey.