It may seem strange to the reader, but it is nevertheless true, that the meanings of all these terms, which had been settled long ago, and in my opinion with a great approach towards correctness, by Adam Smith, have of late been called in question, and altered. Footnote 2: Wealth of Nations, b. ii. c. iii. p. i. vol. ii. 6th ed. Footnote 3: Traité d’ Economie Politique, liv. i. c. i. pp. 2, 4, 4th ed. Footnote 4: Wealth of Nations, b. i. c. v. p. 43. 6th edit. Footnote 5: Polit. Econ. c. xx. p. 320. 3rd Edit. Footnote 6: Polit. Econ. c. xx. p. 326. 3rd edit.—It may be remarked, by the way, that Mr. Ricardo here uses labour as a measure of value in the sense in which I think it ought always to be used, and not according to his own theory. He measures the exchangeable value of the plate and velvet, not by the quantity of labour worked up in them, but by the quantity they will command or employ. Footnote 7: Polit. Econ. c. i. sec. iii. pp. 16, 18, 3rd edit. Footnote 8: Polit. Econ. c. vii. p. 137, 3rd edit. Footnote 9: Id. p. 152. Footnote 10: Polit. Econ. c. v. p. 98, 3rd edit. Footnote 11: Polit. Econ. c. i. sec. vi. p. 45, 3rd edit. Footnote 12: Elements of Polit. Econ. c. ii. sec. iii. p. 75, 2nd edit. Footnote 13: Elements of Polit. Econ. c. iii. sec. ii. p. 92. Footnote 14: Elements of Polit. Econ. c. iii. sec. ii. p. 94. Footnote 15: Id. c. iii. sec. ii. p. 95. Footnote 16: Sec. viii. p. 188. Footnote 17: Elements of Polit. Econ. c. iv. s. iii. p. 225. If the demand of every individual were equal to his supply, in the correct sense of the expression, it would be a proof that he could always sell his commodity for the costs of production, including fair profits; and then even a _partial_ glut would be impossible. The argument proves too much. It is very strange that Mr. Mill should not have seen what appears to be so very obvious,—that supply must always be proportioned to _quantity_, and demand to _value_. Footnote 18: Elem. of Polit. Econ. c. iv. s. iii. p. 233. Footnote 19: Elem. of Polit. Econ. c. iv. s. iii. p. 234. Footnote 20: Foreign trade is, no doubt, mainly a trade of barter; but the question whether British woollens find an adequate market in the United States, does not depend upon their purchasing the same quantity of tobacco as usual, but upon whether the tobacco, or whatever the returns may be, will purchase the British money or the British labour necessary to enable the woollen manufacturer to carry on his business successfully. If both woollen manufactures and tobacco are below the costs of production in money or labour, both parties may be carrying on a losing trade, at the time when the rate at which the two articles exchange with each other is the same as usual. This is the answer to the pamphlet, which M. Say addressed to me some years ago. Footnote 21: