"It is plain that the capital and labour employed in carrying
commodities from where they are to be produced to where they are to
be consumed, and in dividing them into minute portions so as to fit
the wants of consumers, are really as productive as if they were
employed in agriculture or in manufactures."--_Principles_, 166.

The man who carries the food adds, as he seems to think, as much to
the quantity to be consumed as did the one who ploughed the ground and
sowed the seed; and he who stands at the counter measuring cloth adds
as much to the quantity of cloth as did he who produced it. No
benefit, in his view, results from any saving of the labour of
transportation or exchange. He has, therefore, no faith in the
advantage to be derived from the local application of labour or
capital. He believes that it matters nothing to the farmer of Ireland
whether his food be consumed on the farm or at a distance from
it--whether his grass be fed on the land or carried to market--whether
the manure be returned to the land or wasted on the road--whether, of
course, the land be impoverished or enriched. He is even disposed to
believe that it is frequently more to the advantage of the people of
that country that the food there produced should be divided among the
labourers of France or Italy than among themselves.[140]

He believes in the advantage of large manufacturing towns at a
distance from those who produce the food and raw materials of
manufacture; and that perfect freedom of trade consists in the quiet
submission of the farmers and planters of the world to the working of
a system which Dr. Smith, regarded as tending so greatly to "the
discouragement of agriculture," that it was the main object of his
work to teach the people of Britain that it was not more unjust to