ON PROFITS. 
65 
his cloth, sells it at an advanced price, and pur- 
chases corn, or exchanges it directly for corn, 
the result is, that he gets more corn for the same 
quantity of cloth than he did before. If B the 
grower of corn does the same with his produce, 
he gets more cloth. But a cannot obtain from 
B more corn for the same quantity of cloth, at 
the same time that B obtains from A more cloth 
for the same quantity of corn. Consequently 
the value of goods cannot rise. Moreover, if 
all commodities rise, they must rise in relation 
to something, and as it is manifestly absurd 
that all commodities should at once rise in re- 
lation to each other, this something must be 
labour. But, by the supposition, labour itself 
rises in relation to all commodities; whence it 
is a contradiction to maintain, that a universal 
rise in the value of labour can increase the 
value of commodities. 
It may be necessary to repeat the qualifica- 
tion with which the doctrine, that if labour rise 
in value profits must fall, is to be received. 
It is true only when the productive power