300 The “absolute formation” of capital above described is, of course, the only one in the general economy of mankind. In the economy of individuals, we frequently meet with another which is only “relative,” as when the increase of one’s resources is attended by as great or even greater decrease of another’s. This is the case, for instance, where privileges or monopolies are granted. The same phenomenon is found also in the intercourse of economies of different nations. _Supra_, § 64. 301 Thus _Cicero_, De Off., II, 3, 4. Nature may indeed produce mere value in use without the coöperation of labor, in the narrow sense of the word; as, for instance, a forest which protects a district from avalanches etc. But “everything which has been transformed into goods tends constantly to return to its natural state, and to withdraw itself from the life of goods.” _Stein_, Lehrbuch. 302 Compare _List_, System der Polit. Œkon. But see also the very fine discussion of _J. S. Mill_, Principles, IV, ch. VI, 2, on the dreariness of nature, when taken exclusive possession of by man; “with every rood of land brought into cultivation which is capable of growing food for human beings; every flowery waste or natural pasture plowed up; all quadrupeds or birds which are not domesticated for man’s use, exterminated as his rivals for food; every hedgerow or superfluous tree rooted out, and scarcely a place left where a wild shrub or flower could grow, without being eradicated as a weed, in the name of improved agriculture.” 303 In Paris, in 1820, the necessary tools of a rag-gatherer cost 6-¼ francs. _Garnier_, Elements d’Econ.-polit., 43. 304 It is not to be overlooked that all labor expended for a distant end also falls under the head of capital. See _Droz_, Economie politique, 1829, I, 6. 305 For a good exposition as to how England has need of more agricultural products, the East Indies of more capital, and the West Indies of more labor, see _Fawcett_, Manual of P. E., 110. 306 It is a very significant fact, that, at present, in certain European countries, in Germany for instance, the laborer is called a _taker_, and the capitalist a _giver_ of work. The expressions employed by _Canard_, _Say_ and _Hermann_, teach a similar lesson. _ 307 Schäffle_, Kapitalismus und Socialismus, 124 seq. 308 It is evident, that, absolutely considered, the predominating factor of an earlier period may continue to increase during the following: and, as a rule, it does continue to increase.