DIVISION OF LABOR. in political econo my. an expression designating, somewhat awk wardly, the fact that in modern production each workman performs a part only of the process of manufacture. His work is eoiirdinated with that of others to complete the whole. The fact of division is dependent on the fa et of which is the essential feature. Foreign econo mists have deemed it wise to use the more general term but in English econn mics the tern] division of labor has become consecrated through the labors of Adallt Smith, and it would be idle at this late day to substi tute the more exact formulation. Adam Smith drew attention to the increased productiveness which results when. in the process of manufae lure. the several operations are apportioned to difTerent workmen, so that each workman shall perform eontinually one operation. instead of per forming several in succession. This is the nar rowest view- of the division of labor. and sub sequent Writer: have extended the term so that it includes not only the separation of processes in one employment, but also the separation of employments. The fact that one man is exeln •ively a carpenter and another exclusively a smith enhances their combined prodnetion over what it would he if eaeli were a jaek-of all trades. Other writers have still further extended the notion, and speak of a national division of labor, by which they would de-4,mate the peculiar apti tudes of certain nations for certain branches of production. and which under a system of un commerce would probably promote a contrast between the economic act it ities of the several parts of the world. The division of labor has become one of the commonplaces of modern industry, and we do mot perhaps sufficiently realize how entirely the effectiveness of modern production rests upon it. It may he well to re view briefly the advantages of the division of labor set forth with so much skill by Adam Smith. which subsequent experience has so amply verified. In the first place, it promotes in a high degree the skill of the laborer. Ity devoting his
energies solely to one operation. he acquires in it a dexterity which could not have been obtained if his attention had been given to many things. The hand that daily performs the saute task come: to do it almost automatieally. ith the better separation of labor, it is possible to em ploy persons according to their capacities. While some operations require great strength. others demand nicety of touch and extreme delicacy of handling. The weak, who find no place in the ruder labors of agriculture or mining. find in manufaeturing a place for their labor. Without discussing at this point whether the increase of the labor of women and of young persons has been a social benefit. we can readily see that the division of labor which has made it possible has increased the national production by practieally increasing the number of laborers, and diminish ing the relative number of dependent persons. Another advantage of division of labor lies in the saving of labor and of time. The skilled work men make better use of the materials intrusted to them than do those who are not trained. and thus prevent waste: while the continuity of em ployment przwtically increases working hours by saving the linty which would otherwise be spent in passing from one employment to an other. To realize what this means, one has only to compare the labors of the agricultural population. where division of labor is not prac ticable to the same extent as in other forms of production, with those of the artisan chi Not the least advantage resulting from the divi sion of labor is the stimulus which is given to in lention by the concentration of energies upon distinct and definite processes. While it may he trne that learned men have made some of the most noted invention: of our time. it is equally true that the many thousands of modifications of tools and machines which have made them feasi ble and workable have come largely from those who have been in daily contact with their opera tion.