factory result, without also inquiring further what the same money will purchase in each of the two countries. For instance, a laborer at Buenos Ayres can earn an ox in three days, which, in New England, would cost him from one to three months' wages, and in England still more; whereas the English or New England laborer can earn more cloth in the same time than the one at Buenos Ayres, though the money price of wages is highest in the latter place. In all the speculations and treatises upon this subject, we do not know of any full and satisfactory comparison of the real rate of wages, for the corresponding kinds of labor, in different countries. If we limit the inquiry to the same community, we first ask what is the aggregate production, and how great a proportion of the whole annual product goes to labor and skill, and how much to rent and capital. And here we readily perceive a gradual change in the course of the progress of a community; for, in the early stages of improvement, and while the population is comparatively thin, as in the U. States, the rent, and so the value, of lands is low; that is, the holder of a particular piece of cultivated land receives but a small proportion of the annual products; but, as the population thickens, the proprietor of the same tract will receive a greater proportion of the whole products of the same cultivation than his predecessors. Take the instance of the same crop of grass, on the same piece of ground, for a hundred successive years, from the time of felling the forest, until a populous town has grown up in the neighborhood; the wages for cutting and securing the crop will, at first, be one half or three quarters of its value, and will diminish, by degrees, to one fifth or one tenth, and the value and rent of the land will rise accordingly; that is, land becomes comparatively scarce in proportion to the population, and the demand for its use; and all raw products, that is, all products the value of which consists mostly of rent, will rise in comparative value. This may take place, in a great degree, through a whole country, as has been the case in England. But the whole territory does not continue to produce merely the same quantity, since, as the wants and consumption of the community increase, the Jabor bestowed upon the same area will be increased for the purpose of augmenting the quantity of products, so that the land-owner may, in fact, receive a less quantity, and a less proportion of the prod

ucts, and yet have a higher rent for his ground every successive year, because the quantity which he does receive, on account of its increased comparative value, will command, on the whole, more of the things for which he wishes to exchange it. During the same time, the laborer will receive, for the same labor, a less quantity and less proportion of the raw products; and yet, taking into consideration all that he wants to consuine, he may, on the whole, continue to have as high wages as at first, whether we regard the absolute. quantity of consumable things which he can cominand by his labor, or the proportion which it will bear to the whole annual product of the community. Though some parts of his food, and all his fuel, may cost him more labor, other parts of his food, particularly that brought from abroad, and his shelter and clothing, and especially all those articles that come under the class of moderate luxuries, will probably cost him less labor. In the progress of a community in which property is well protected, accumulation gradually reduces the rate of interest, thus reducing the proportional amount of the cost of production, as far as it depends on the use of capital, whereby a compensation, in part at least, is made for the enhancement of rents. All the inventions and facilities to production, transportstion and exchange, also contribute to make a similar compensation. these causes, it may happen that, in the advancement of the population, wealth, arts and industry of a community, though a smaller proportion of the whole products goes to compensate mere labor, still a greater absolute amount of products may go to compensate the same labor; that is, a laborer may be able to supply himself, by his industry merely, with a greater quantity of necessaries und luxuries. In some respects, the laborer sufïèrs by the advancement of a community; in others, he is benefited. But another view of the subject is of the very greatest importance in considering the condition of a people, namely, the distribution of that portion of the annual products that is allotted to industry and skill among the different classes of the industrious. It is not possible to estimate exactly what proportion the compensation for making out a legal process, visiting a patient, officiating at the celebration of public worship, superintending the concerns of a bank, commanding a ship or a regiment, &c., ought justly, or for the best interests of a community, to bear to the wages of mere

From

manual labor, requiring very little skill; nor, if we could determine this proportion, would it be practicable to establish it. The law has interposed, in many instances, in different countries, to regulate the price of labor and commodities; but it is now universally admitted that any such interpositions are most usually ineffectual, and always prejudicial. But though positive regulations, in this respect, will never remedy the evils of an unjust distribution, yet a community may be so constituted, and so situated, that the spontaneous operation of internal causes will effect a nearly just apportionment of the rewards of skill and industry among the various classes of the industrious. To ascertain what circumstances will have this operation, we must inquire what class first suffers from an inequality; and we find it to be those who depend wholly on their labor for subsistence. This is the part of the population where misery begins; and thence it spreads and accumulates until it is felt by the whole; for every part of the population will inevitably sympathize, more or less, with every other. It is utterly impossible for any class so to separate itself from the rest as not to be affected, directly or indirectly, by their enjoyments and sufferings. How, then, can the wages of mere labor, requiring very little skill, be sustained at a just rate, so that the laborer shall have his fair proportion of the annual products? This can be done only by diffusing and maintaining good habits, industry and intelligence among the poor class. It should be the policy of every society to make all the influences, moral, political, economical and social, bear, with the greatest possible energy, upon this point. It is not practicable to sustain this class by external helps: when they have once become degraded, it is scarcely possible to renovate and restore them. The true doctrine is that of prevention.

WAGNER, Ernest; a German poet, born in 1768, and died in 1812. His poem, called Wilibald's Views of Life, is celebrated. His complete works were published in 1827 et seq., at Leipsic.

WAGNERITE; a mineral, found in complicated crystals, the primary form of which is an oblique rhombic prism, whose lateral planes incline under angles of 95° 25 and 84° 35. Lustre vitreous; color several shades of yellow, sometimes nearly orange-yellow, often inclining to gray; streak white; translucent; hardness nearly that of feldspar; specific gravity 3.11. It consists of

It is found in veins of quartz, embraced in clay-slate, and occurs near Werfen, in Salzburg.

WAGONS most probably originated from rude vehicles dragged on cylindrical logs, which must soon have suggested the idea of the axis and solid wheel, even now used in Portugal by the peasants. According to Moses, Egypt was the country where wagons were first used. The Chinese call the inventor Hiene-Yuene. The Greeks attributed the invention to Erichthonius, fourth king of Athens, and say that he used them in consequence of lameness. Wagons with two wheels may have been the first constructed; but Homer mentions four-wheeled wagons, the invention of which was ascribed to the Phrygians. Whoever first conceived the idea of an axis was a most ingenious man; and he who applied it to wheels and wagons has become one of the greatest benefactors of mankind. Much time elapsed before wagons were used for pleasure carriages. The sedan chair and horseback were long preferred. In war, use was sooner made of the wagon. Moses mentions the war-chariots of Pharaoh. Theseus is said to have introduced chariots among the Greeks. The horses were covered with iron scales. At the end of the pole lances were fastened, and at the side and below were scythes. These chariots were driven into the ranks of the enemy. The Grecks, besides, used two-wheeled chariots, each containing two persons, one of whom drove while the other threw spears. The chariots were open behind, and had low wheels. The Romans used them early. In the twelve tables (q. v.) the arcera is mentioned. The Romans gave different names to the wagons, according to the purpose to which they were applied, as carpentum, a two-wheeled vehicle, with a vaulted covering, used particularly by the Roman ladies; carruca, a kind of state coach (q. v.); cisium, essedum, &c. They had also triumphal chariots (currus triumphalis). Wagons are drawn by men or beasts, or propelled by machinery. It is reported that, at the panathenaa, a galley was moved through the city by internal wheel-work. From the time of Roger Bacon (in the thirteenth century) to our

days, many trials of locomotive wagons have been made, of which the steamwagon, lately brought to such perfection, is the most important. The wind has also been frequently used to propel wagons. Simon Stevin, of Bruges, invented a sailing wagon for twenty-eight persons, which, on even ground, is said to have travelled fourteen Dutch leagues in two hours! Mr. Slater, an Englishman, travelled in a sailing wagon from Alexandria to Bassora.-Respecting the invention of wagons, harnesses, &c., among the ancients, see the work of Ginzrot (Munich, 1817, 2 vols.). Kites have also been used to propel wagons. (See Velocipede, and Steam.)

WAGRAM, BATTLE OF, on July 5 and 6, 1809, gained by Napoleon over the archduke Charles. It decided the fate of Austria, on the same field on which Rodolph of Hapsburg (q. v.), in 1278, had been victorious over the proud Ottocar, and laid the foundation of Austria's power. The severe loss which Napoleon had sustained in the battle of Aspern (q. v.), on the occasion of his unsuccessful attempt to pass the Danube, made repose necessary for his army. He also needed reinforcements. These he received in the army of the viceroy of Italy, who had forced the Austrians, at last, from that country to Hungary. Bernadotte was also approaching with the Saxons; and other divisions were on the way. The archduke Charles, on the left bank of the Danube, was in a less fortunate situation. His loss, also, had been severe; and his army consisted, in a great measure, of raw troops hastily levied. Napoleon remained in Vienna, and prepared every thing for a decisive struggle, whilst his antagonist appeared to stand merely on the defensive; at least nothing was done by him to disturb the French in their preparations on the islands of the Danube. Heavy ordnance was carried from the arsenals of Vienna to the well-constructed works on these islands. Materials for bridges were provided, and every precaution taken to prevent a second failure in the attempt to pass the river. The position of the antagonists permitted the most accurate knowledge of all the movements of both armies. July 1, Napoleon concentrated his forces, and fixed his head-quarters at Lobau. Presburg had been occupied by Davoust a few days previously. Vandamme guarded the Danube as far as Lintz. The whole number of the French forces has been estimated at 180,000; and if this number is over

rated, it is certain that the Austrian force was not half as great. From July 2, the French attempted, at several points on the islands, to establish a secure communication with the opposite bank, without being prevented by the fire of the Austrians; and on July 4, Napoleon concentrated the greatest part of his troops on the island of Lobau. At ten-o'clock in the evening, the first troops, in small numbers, passed in boats over the Danube, and established themselves on the left bank, during a tremendous storm, and supported by a warm fire from all the batteries, directed against Enzersdorf and the Austrian redoubts erected on those spots where a landing was expected. Enzersdorf was in flames, and shed a brilliant light on the Danube. With great skill and promptness, excellent bridges were thrown over the river, and as early as two o'clock, the whole army had reached the left bank. It seems to have been in consequence of a settled plan, that Charles did not endeavor to prevent the passage of Napoleon, and that the Austrians immediately made a retrograde movement. On the morning of the 5th, the French army extended itself in the Marchfeld (a plain many leagues in length, on the left bank of the Danube, and containing the town of Wagram). A numerous artillery along the whole French line played incessantly. The Austrians were slowly forced back during the day. In point of fact, the archduke Charles had at this time but three divisions to oppose to the French forces. It was not till towards night that his other forces could be brought into action. It is impossible for us to give the details of the battle, or to describe the repeated assaults on Wagram by the Saxons. The French army bivouacked on some places very near the enemy. Some have believed that the retreat of Charles, on July 5, was in order to place the French troops between his forces and those which were approaching, under the archduke John, from Hungary. But the army of the archduke John was much too weak to produce a decisive effect, and, moreover, would have been opposed by the disposable French divisions, and the 10,000 Bavarians under Wrede. Early in the morning of July 6, the extreme left wing of the French, under Bernadotte and Masséna, was extended to Hirschstätten; the centre, comprising the guards and the Italian army, was at Raschdorf; to the right were Marmont and Oudinot; and Davoust was on the extreme right. The archduke

Charles now projected an attack, en echélon, from his right, against the French left. Thus it was hoped that the Austrian army might relieve itself from the extreme pressure upon its left wing. At first, this attack was successful: the French were forced back as far as Enzersdorf. The Austrian centre was not so fortunate: it could not advance equally with the right wing, and thus a dangerous extension of the Austrian forces took place. Napoleon knew how to keep them in this situation, and thus to obstruct their further attacks; and soon after, having turned the Austrian left wing, he began to act on the offensive, and endeavored to decide the battle by destroying the enemy's centre. Masséna attacked Aderkiaa most violently; and, had he succeeded, all would have been lost; but the Austrians fought with great bravery against the cavalry, artillery and guards, and repeated attacks were repulsed. Had the archduke John arrived at this time on the left wing, as he was ordered to do, a favorable result might have been obtained; but he did not come up, and the French troops spread far to the right. Upon the third attack, they occupied the height of Markgrafen-Neusicdel, and the Austrian right wing was deprived of the advantages which it had gained. The Austrians retreated. The archduke John, it is said, was detained near Presburg in collecting his corps. It was not until late in the evening, that he heard from the field of battle that every thing was decided. To save his own troops, he again retreated from the Marchfeld. Both armies had displayed great valor. The loss of the Austrians may have amounted to 27,000 men killed and wounded (they had taken, however, 7000 prisoners, twelve eagles and colors, and cleven cannons). The loss of the French cannot be reckoned at less. On the 7th, 9th and 10th, the archduke retreated, constantly fighting, to the heights of Znaym, where Marmont and Masséna reached him. On the 11th, a battle was fought, which, however, was interrupted by the armistice offered by Austria, and concluded, July 12, at Znaym, after which the negotiations for peace commenced. For information re; specting the whole campaign, see general Pelet's (aid-de-camp of Masséna) Mémoire sur la Guerre de 1809, en Allemagne, avec les Opérations particulières des Corps d'Italic, de Pologne, de Saxe, de Naples, et de Walcheren (Paris, 1825, seq., 4 vols., with an atlas).

WAGTAIL (motacula); small birds which

seem to be peculiar to the castern continent. They differ from the warblers only in their longer legs, more slender form, and longer tail. They never perch on trees or shrubs, but frequent the margins of ponds and water-courses, and are continually elevating and depressing the tail; hence the name. The common European wagtail (M. alba) is a familiar bird, which seems to seek the society of man and domestic animals, and is even seen frequently to rest upon the backs of cattle while they are grazing. The vicinity of mills is observed to be its favorite resort. The plumage is a mixture of black, white and gray. It is widely diffused throughout the eastern continent.

WAHABEES, WAHABITES, OF WECHABITES, is the name of several Arab tribes, who profess the religious faith which Sheik Mohammed, son of Abdel Wahab, taught in the middle of the eighteenth century, and, like the founder of the religion of the Koran, sought to propagate by art and courage. Sheik Mohammed, belonging to the great tribe of the Tamini (born in 1729, in the town of Ajen, situated near the desert, in the district of Al Ared), had acquired great learning in Bassora, Bagdad and Damascus. He taught at first in Ajen, and soon made proselytes of the inhabitants of the district of Al Ared. Claiming divine inspiration, he taught, like the Koran, the doctrines of which he but partially received, the existence of an only God, the Author of the world, the Rewarder of the good, and the Punisher of the bad; but he rejected all the stories contained in the Koran, especially those concerning Mohammed, whom he considered merely a man beloved of God, but branded the worship of him as a crime directly opposed to the true adoration of the Divinity. He also prohibited the wealth and splendor which are found in the mosques of the Mohammedans. All who should oppose this new doctrine were to be destroyed by fire and sword. Mohammed first converted to his newdoctrines the sovereign of Derayeh and Lahsa, Ebn-Sehud, whom he proclaimed prince (emir) and protector of the new sect, of which he declared himself high-priest, thus separating the spiritual and secular authorities, which were afterwards hereditary in the families of Ebn-Sehud and Sheik Mohammed. The principal seat of the Wababees was the city of Derayeh, in the province of Nedsjed, and Jamama, 250 miles west of Bassora. As the votaries of the new faith were all inspired with the bighest enthusiasm, prepared for

all trials, indefatigable, brave and cruel (conversion or death being their watchword), their dominion spread with incredible rapidity among the surrounding Arab tribes, of which, in a short time, twentysix were subjugated, incorporated with the original Wahabees, filled with hatred of Mohammedanism, and taught to delight in plundering the treasures of the mosques. Sehud's son and successor, Abd-Elaziz, could bring into the field 120,000 cavalry. Well provided with camels and horses, and armed with sword and spear, the Wahabites, though resembling the Bedouins (q. v.), and destitute of any considerable artillery, which they obtained only by conquest, were dangerous enemies. The nature of the country, their mode of life, and their religious creed, formed their character, which, from the mountainous regions of their original seat, is even more savage and bold than that of the first followers of Mohammed. The disorders which prevailed in all parts of the dominions of the Porte, including the Arabian countries under its protection, was especially favorable to the enterprises of the Wahabees, who, from their seat between the Persian gulf and · the Red sea, had reached several parts of Asiatic Turkey, before the slightest measures were taken to put a stop to their devastations and conversions. In 1801, the pacha of Bagdad first received orders to proceed, with the tribes which had adhered to Mohammedanism, against the Wahabees, who, however, by great presents, bribed the generals sent against them to retreat, and then attacked the town of Iman Hussein, destroyed it, and, after acquiring much plunder, fled back to their deserts. On this occasion, they also pillaged the mosque of Ali, which was highly venerated by the Persians. The Persian monarch, Fath Ali, threatened them with his vengeance, but was prevented from executing his purpose by civil wars. The daring Wahabites now turned an eager gaze upon the far greater treasures of Mecca, the holy city. Here Ghaleb, a younger brother, had deprived his elder brother, Abd-Al-Mein, of the sherifate. On pretence of avenging this wrong, Abd-Elaziz sent his son Sehud, with 100,000 men, to Mecca, where he put Ghaleb to flight, but was prevented, for a while, from conquering the city, by the arrival of the great caravan, under the escort of the pacha of Damascus, who, however, entered into a treaty, not to stay *The use of coffee and tobacco, as well as of silk clothing, was forbidden by their law.

more than three days in Mecca, and not to interfere in the contest of the brothers respecting the sherifate. After the departure of the caravan, the Wahabees took the holy city without resistance, murdered many sheiks and Mohammedans, who persisted in their religious faith, and reinstated, indeed, Abd-AlMein, but destroyed all the sacred monuments, and carried off immense treasures. Leaving behind only a small garrison of 100 men, Sehud next attempted, in vain, the conquest of Jidda and Medina, after which he returned to Derayeh, where, meanwhile, his father had been murdered, in 1803, by a Persian. Sehud was now prince of the Wahabees. Their highpriest was Hussein the Blind, the eldest son of Sheik Mohammed. The misfortunes which they suffered were soon repaired. In 1806, the Wahabees appeared more numerous than ever; plundered the caravans of pilgrims going to the holy sepulchre; got possession of the Mahmel (a splendid box, in which the grand seignior sends, every year, the presents destined for the tomb of the prophet); and conquered Mecca, Medina, and even Jidda, marking their path by bloodshed and conversions, among which, that of the mufti of Mecca excited the most astonishment. The fear of the Wahabees spread throughout the East, and even the British were apprehensive that their commerce would be endangered, several bands of warriors having proceeded to the Persian gulf, formed a junction with the pirates, and disturbed the communication between Bassora, Mascat and India. The British, therefore, took the imam of Mascat, against whom his brother had rebelled in the country of Oman, under their protection, and, to defend him against the Wahabees, sent him, from Bombay, in 1809, a fleet and army. The chastisement of their common enemies was fully effected in several battles on the sea and coasts, and especially by the demolition of their chief place of assembling, Ras el Elyma (Kherim), where 3200 inhabitants were killed, and 1600 taken prisoners. On the other hand, the British, as a condition of their further assistance, stipulated with the imam for the islands of the Persian gulf, Bahrein and Zebora, celebrated for their rich pearl fisheries. In 1810, the sublime Porte summoned Mohammed Ali, pacha of Cairo, and the pachas of Damascus and Acre, to undertake an expedition against the pacha of Bagdad, Jussuff Pacha, and his allies, the Wahabees. The pacha of Acre obeyed this command with equal