OF VALUE.

205

the preceding part of his section is occupied in
proving labour to be the cause of value; and it
is only at the conclusion that he deviates into
this laxity of expression™.

[t appears, therefore, that if we do not aim at
undue generalization, but are conient with a
simple statement of facts, the value of objects,
in the production of which competition operates
without restraint, may be correctly stated to
arise principally from the cost of production;
and that cost of production may be either la-
bour or capital, or both. Whatever the mere
labourer produces costs him his labour: if a
man is a capitalist as well as a labourer. what

* In the second edition of his Elements, Mr. Milt himself,
in the section succeeding that containing the passage here
animadverted upon, has distinctly pointed out the difference
between what he calls <¢ the regulator,” and the measure of
value, and has mentioned two circumstances which, he
says, render it impossible that the former should be em-
ployed in the latter capacity, It is therefore surprising
that he should have retained a passage, which confounds
what he has subsequently taken express pains to distin-
ruish.