To this view of consumption, it will be my continual endeavor to lead the protectionists; for in this is the end of all my efforts, the solution of every problem. I must continually repeat to them that restriction, by impeding commerce, by limiting the division of labor, by forcing it to combat difficulties of situation and temperature, must in its results diminish the quantity produced by any fixed quantum of labor. And what can it benefit us that the smaller quantity produced under the protective system bears the same _nominal value_ as the greater quantity produced under the free trade system? Man does not live on _nominal values_, but on real articles of produce; and the more abundant these articles are, no matter what price they may bear, the richer is he. XII. DOES PROTECTION RAISE THE RATE OF WAGES? Workmen, your situation is singular! you are robbed, as I will presently prove to you.... But no; I retract the word; we must avoid an expression which is violent; perhaps indeed incorrect; inasmuch as this spoliation, wrapped in the sophisms which disguise it, is practiced, we must believe, without the intention of the spoiler, and with the consent of the spoiled. But it is nevertheless true that you are deprived of the just compensation of your labor, while no one thinks of causing _justice_ to be rendered to you. If you could be consoled by noisy appeals to philanthropy, to powerless charity, to degrading alms-giving, or if high-sounding words would relieve you, these indeed you can have in abundance. But _justice_, simple _justice_--nobody thinks of rendering you this. For would it not be _just_ that after a long day's labor, when you have received your little wages, you should be permitted to exchange them for the largest possible sum of comforts that you can obtain voluntarily from any man whatsoever upon the face of the earth? Let us examine if _injustice_ is not done to you, by the legislative limitation of the persons from whom you are allowed to buy those things which you need; as bread, meat, cotton and woolen cloths, etc.; thus fixing (so to express myself) the artificial price which these articles must bear. Is it true that protection, which avowedly raises prices, and thus injures you, raises proportionably the rate of wages? On what does the rate of wages depend? One of your own class has energetically said: "When two workmen run after a master, wages fall; when two masters run after a workman, wages rise." Allow me, in more laconic phrase, to employ a more scientific, though perhaps a less striking expression: "The rate of wages depends upon the proportion which the supply of labor bears to the demand." On what depends the _demand_ for labor?