labour for its greater ease.[1] Then if A works three hours, he produces 3 a, which is one a more than both the men want. And if B works three hours, he produces only 1½ b, or half of b less than both want. But if A work three hours and B six, A has 3 a, and B has 3 b, a maintenance in the right proportion for both for a day and a half; so that each might take half a day's rest. But as B has worked double time, the whole of this day's rest belongs in equity to him. Therefore the just exchange should be, A giving two a for one b, has one a and one b;—maintenance for a day. B giving one b for two a, has two a and two b;—maintenance for two days.
But B cannot rest on the second day, or A would be left without the article which B produces. Nor is there any means of making the exchange just, unless a third labourer is called in. Then one workman. A, produces a, and two, B and C, produce b:—A, working three hours, has three a;—B, three hours, 1½ b;—
- ↑ This "greater ease" ought to be allowed for by a diminution in the times of the divided work; but as the proportion of times would remain the same, I do not introduce this unnecessary complexity into the calculation.
