The three philosophers that will be examined are Adam Ferguson, David Hume and Adam Smith. By evaluating their thoughts on the topic of wealth, it is possible to draw conclusions on the questions presented. Every thinker has an answer to these questions, however there may be some overlap in the thoughts of these men as they were peers writing at the same time. The first philosopher to be discussed is Adam Ferguson along with his work An Essay on the History of Civil Liberty. Ferguson provides his understanding of wealth and its effects in the section of his work entitled “Of Population and Wealth.” It does not explicitly define wealth as in the form of a dictionary entry, but it must be inferred. Ferguson's central claim in this section is that there is a connection between a growing population and the growing wealth and prosperity of a nation. When discussing the difference between groups of people and their agricultural and productive habits, he writes: "if a people, while they maintain their frugality, increase their industry and improve their arts, their numbers must increase in proportion. Here for the cultivated fields of Europe are more populated than the wilds of America or the plains of Tartary” (Ferguson 232, Nabu Press 2010). Ferguson goes on to discuss the factors that contribute to the growth of wealth, writing, “while the arts improve and riches increase; as individuals' possessions, or their prospects of earning, correspond to their opinion of what is necessary to support a family, they attend to its concerns with alacrity" (232-233) .Ferguson not only argues that wealth and population are intrinsically linked to each other, as previously stated, but provides approximate answers to questions that...are in the middle of the paper...and can only be dictated. from the "invisible hand" of the market. Regarding monopolies, an important component of Smith's interpretation of the free market is the variety of competition. When part of the market becomes monopolized, this prevents the market from reaching its full earning potential. Smith's criticism of monopolies is found in the section of his work where he also criticizes mercantilism. In discussing the mercantile enterprises that European nations had with their colonies in the Americas, Smith shows why monopolies are not advantageous since “it is thus that the single advantage which monopoly affords to a single order of men, is in many different ways injurious for the general interest of the country" (311). What Smith argues is that to create wealth it is necessary to allow a nation's economic activities to operate freely and in all possible markets..