第14章

ThisentirenullificationofnationalityandofStatepower，

thisexaltationofindividualismtothepositionofauthorofall

effectivepower，couldbemadeplausibleonlybymakingthemain

objectofinvestigationtobenotthepowerwhicheffects，butthe

thingeffected，namely，materialwealth，orratherthevaluein

exchangewhichthethingeffectedpossesses。Materialismmustcome

totheaidofindividualism，inordertoconcealwhatanenormous

amountofpoweraccruestoindividualsfromnationality，from

nationalunity，andfromthenationalconfederationofthe

productivepowers。Abaretheoryofvaluesmustbemadetopass

currentasnationaleconomy，becauseindividualsaloneproduce

values，andtheState，incapableofcreatingvalues，mustlimitits

operationstocallingintoactivity，protecting，andpromotingthe

productivepowersofindividuals。Inthiscombination，the

quintessenceofpoliticaleconomymaybestatedasfollows，viz。：

Wealthconsistsinthepossessionofobjectsofexchangeablevalue；

objectsofexchangeablevalueareproducedbythelabourof

individualsincombinationwiththepowersofnatureandwith

capital。Bythedivisionoflabour，theproductivenessofthe

labourisincreased；capitalisaccumulatedbysavings，by

productionexceedingconsumption。Thegreaterthetotalamountof

capital，somuchthegreateristhedivisionoflabour，andhence

thecapacitytoproduce。Privateinterestisthemosteffectual

stimulustolabourandtoeconomy。Thereforethehighestwisdomof

statecraftconsistsinplacingnoobstacleinthewayofprivate

industry，andincaringonlyforthegoodadministrationof

justice。Andhencealsoitisfollytoinducethesubjectsofa

State，bymeansofStatelegislativemeasures，toproduceforthem

selvesanythingwhichtheycanbuycheaperfromabroad。Asystemso

consistentasthisis，whichsetsforththeelementsofwealth，

whichsoclearlyexplainstheprocessofitsproduction，and

apparentlysocompletelyexposestheerrorsoftheprevious

schools，couldnotfail，indefaultofanyother，tomeetwith

acceptance。Themistakehasbeensimply，thatthissystematbottom

isnothingelsethanasystemoftheprivateeconomyofallthe

individualpersonsinacountry，oroftheindividualsofthewhole

humanrace，asthateconomywoulddevelopandshapeitself，under

astateofthingsinwhichtherewerenodistinctnations，

nationalities，ornationalinterests——nodistinctivepolitical

constitutionsordegreesofcivilisation——nowarsornational

animosities；thatitisnothingmorethanatheoryofvalues；a

mereshopkeeper\'sorindividualmerchant\'stheory——nota

scientificdoctrine，showinghowtheproductivepowersofanentire

nationcanbecalledintoexistence，increased，maintained，and

preserved——forthespecialbenefitofitscivilisation，welfare，

might，continuance，andindependence。

Thissystemregardseverythingfromtheshopkeeper\'spointof

view。Thevalueofanythingiswealth，accordingtoit，soitssole

objectistogainvalues。Theestablishmentofpowersof

production，itleavestochance，tonature，ortotheprovidenceof

God(whicheveryouplease)，onlytheStatemusthavenothingatall

todowithit，normustpoliticsventuretomeddlewiththe

businessofaccumulatingexchangeablevalues。Itisresolvedtobuy

whereveritcanfindthecheapestarticles——thatthehome

manufactoriesareruinedbytheirimportation，mattersnottoit。

Ifforeignnationsgiveabountyontheexportoftheir

manufacturedgoods，somuchthebetter；itcanbuythemsomuchthe

cheaper。Initsviewnoclassisproductivesavethosewhoactually

producethingsvaluableinexchange。Itwellrecogniseshowthe

divisionoflabourpromotesthesuccessofabusinessindetail，

butithasnoperceptionoftheeffectofthedivisionoflabouras

affectingawholenation。Itknowsthatonlybyindividualeconomy

canitincreaseitscapital，andthatonlyinproportiontothe

increaseinitscapitalcanitextenditsindividualtrades；butit

setsnovalueontheincreaseoftheproductivepower，which

resultsfromtheestablishmentofnativemanufactories，oronthe

foreigntradeandnationalpowerwhichariseoutofthatincrease。

Whatmaybecomeoftheentirenationinthefuture，istoita

matterofperfectindifference，solongasprivateindividualscan

gainwealth。Ittakesnoticemerelyoftherentyieldedbyland，

butpaysnoregardtothevalueoflandedproperty；itdoesnot

perceivethatthegreatestpartofthewealthofanationconsists

inthevalueofitslandanditsfixedproperty。Fortheinfluence

offoreigntradeonthevalueandpriceoflandedproperty，andfor

thefluctuationsandcalamitiesthencearising；itcaresnota

straw。Inshort，thissystemisthestrictestandmostconsistent

\'mercantilesystem，\'anditisincomprehensiblehowthattermcould

havebeenappliedtothesystemofColbert，themaintendencyof

whichistowardsan\'industrialsystem\'-i。e。asystemwhichhas

solelyinviewthefoundingofanationalindustry——anational

commerce——withoutregardingthetemporarygainsorlossesof

valuesinexchange。

Notwithstanding，wewouldbynomeansdenythegreatmeritsof

AdamSmith。Hewasthefirstwhosuccessfullyappliedthe

analyticalmethodtopoliticaleconomy。Bymeansofthatmethodand

anunusualdegreeofsagacity，hethrewlightonthemostimportant

branchesofthescience，whichwerepreviouslyalmostwholly

obscure。BeforeAdamSmithonlyapracticeexisted；hisworks

rendereditpossibletoconstituteascienceofpoliticaleconomy，

andhehascontributedagreateramountofmaterialsforthat

objectthanallhispredecessorsorsuccessors。

Butthatverypeculiarityofhismindbywhich，inanalysing

thevariousconstituentpartsofpoliticaleconomy，herendered

suchimportantservice，wasthecausewhyhedidnottakea

comprehensiveviewofthecommunityinitsentirety；thathewas

unabletocombineindividualinterestsinoneharmoniouswhole；

thathewouldnotconsiderthenationinpreferencetomere

individuals；thatoutofmereanxietyforthefreedomofactionof

theindividualproducers，helostsightoftheinterestsofthe

entirenation。Hewhosoclearlyperceivedthebenefitsofthe

divisionoflabourinasinglemanufactory，didnotperceivethat

thesameprincipleisapplicablewithequalforcetoentire

provincesandnations。

Withthisopinion，thatwhichDugaldStewartsaysofhim

exactlyagrees。Smithcouldjudgeindividualtraitsofcharacter

withextraordinaryacuteness；butifanopinionwasneededasto

theentirecharacterofamanorofabook，onecouldnotbe

sufficientlyastonishedatthenarrownessandobliquityofhis

views。Nay，hewasincapableofformingacorrectestimateofthe

characterofthosewithwhomhehadlivedformanyyearsinthe

mostintimatefriendship。\'Theportrait，\'sayshisbiographer，\'was

everfulloflifeandexpression，andhadastrongresemblanceto

theoriginalifonecompareditwiththeoriginalfromacertain

pointofview；butitnevergaveatrueandperfectrepresentation

accordingtoallitsdimensionsandcircumstances。\'

Chapter32

TheSystemofValuesofExchange(Continued)——JeanBaptisteSay

andhisSchool

Thisauthoronthewholehasmerelyendeavouredtosystematise，

toelucidate，andtopopularise，thematerialswhichAdamSmithhad

gatheredtogetherafteranirregularfashion。Inthathehas

perfectlysucceeded，inasmuchashepossessedinahighdegreethe

giftofsystematisationandelucidation。Nothingnewororiginalis

tobefoundinhiswritings，saveonlythatheassertedthe

productivenessofmentallabours，whichAdamSmithdenied。Only，

thisview，whichisquitecorrectaccordingtothetheoryofthe

productivepowers，standsopposedtothetheoryofexchangeable

values，andhenceSmithisclearlymoreconsistentthanSay。Mental

labourersproducedirectlynoexchangeablevalues；nay，more，they

diminishbytheirconsumptionthetotalamountofmaterial

productionsandsavings，andhencethetotalofmaterialwealth。

Moreover，thegroundonwhichSayfromhispointofviewincludes

mentallabourersamongtheproductiveclass，viz。becausetheyare

paidwithexchangeablevalues，isanutterlybaselessone，inasmuch

asthosevalueshavebeenalreadyproducedbeforetheyreachthe

handsofthementallabourers；theirpossessoraloneischanged，

butbythatchangetheiramountisnotincreased。Wecanonlyterm

mentallabourersproductiveifweregardtheproductivepowersof

thenation，andnotthemerepossessionofexchangeablevalues，as

nationalwealth。SayfoundhimselfopposedtoSmithinthis

respect，exactlyasSmithhadfoundhimselfopposedtothe

physiocrats。

Inordertoincludemanufacturersamongtheproductiveclass，

Smithhadbeenobligedtoenlargetheideaofwhatconstitutes

wealth；andSayonhisparthadnootheralternativethaneitherto

adopttheabsurdviewthatmentallabourersarenotproductive，as

itwashandeddowntohimbyAdamSmith，orelsetoenlargethe

ideaofwealthasAdamSmithhaddoneinoppositiontothe

physiocrats，namely，tomakeitcompriseproductivepower；andto

argue，nationalwealthdoesnotconsistinthepossessionof

exchangeablevalues，butinthepossessionofpowertoproduce，

justasthewealthofafishermandoesnotconsistinthe

possessionoffish，butintheabilityandthemeansofcontinually

catchingfishtosatisfyhiswants。

Itisnoteworthy，and，sofarasweareaware，notgenerally

known，thatJeanBaptisteSayhadabrotherwhoseplainclear

commonsenseledhimclearlytoperceivethefundamentalerrorof

thetheoryofvalues，andthatJ。B。Sayhimselfexpressedtohis

doubtingbrotherdoubtsastothesoundnessofhisowndoctrine。

LouisSaywrotefromNantes，thatatechnicallanguagehad

becomeprevalentinpoliticaleconomywhichhadledtomuchfalse

reasoning，andthathisbrotherJeanhimselfwasnotfreefrom

it。(1*)AccordingtoLouisSay，thewealthofnationsdoesnot

consistinmaterialgoodsandtheirvalueinexchange，butinthe

abilitycontinuouslytoproducesuchgoods。Theexchangetheoryof

SmithandJ。B。Sayregardswealthfromthenarrowpointofviewof

anindividualmerchant，andthissystem，whichwouldreformthe

(so-called)mercantilesystem，isitselfnothingelsethana

restrictedmercantilesystem。(2*)TothesedoubtsandobjectionsJ。

B。Sayrepliedtohisbrotherthat\'his(J。B。Say\'s)method

(method？)(viz。thetheoryofexchangeablevalues)wascertainly

notthebest，butthatthedifficultywas，tofindabetter。\'(3*)

What！difficulttofindabetter？HadnotbrotherLouis，then，

foundone？No，therealdifficultywasthatpeoplehadnotthe

requisiteacutenesstograspandtofollowouttheideawhichthe

brotherhad(certainlyonlyingeneralterms)expressed；orrather，

perhaps，becauseitwasverydistastefultohavetooverturnthe

alreadyestablishedschool，andtohavetoteachtheprecise

oppositeofthedoctrinebywhichonehadacquiredcelebrity。The

onlyoriginalthinginJ。B。Say\'swritingsistheformofhis

system，viz。thathedefinedpoliticaleconomyasthesciencewhich

showshowmaterialwealthisproduced，distributed，andconsumed。

ItwasbythisclassificationandbyhisexpositionofitthatJ。

B。Saymadehissuccessandalsohisschool，andnowonder：for

hereeverythinglayreadytohishand；heknewhowtoexplainso

clearlyandintelligiblythespecialprocessofproduction，andthe

individualpowersengagedinit；hecouldsetforthsolucidly

(withinthelimitsofhisownnarrowcircle)theprincipleofthe

divisionoflabour，andsoclearlyexpoundthetradeof

individuals。Everyworkingpotter，everyhuckstercouldunderstand

him，anddosothemorereadily，thelessJ。B。Saytoldhimthat

wasneworunknown。Forthatintheworkofthepotter，handsand

skill(labour)mustbecombinedwithclay(naturalmaterial)in

orderbymeansofthepotter\'swheel，theoven，andfuel(capital)，

toproducepots(valuableproductsorvaluesinexchange)，hadbeen

wellknownlongbeforeineveryrespectablepotter\'sworkshop，only

theyhadnotknownhowtodescribethesethingsinscientific

language，andbymeansofittogeneraliseuponthem。Alsothere

wereprobablyveryfewhucksterswhodidnotknowbeforeJ。B。

Say\'stime，thatbyexchangebothpartiescouldgainvaluesin

exchange，andthatifanyoneexported1，000thalers\'worthof

goods，andgotforthem1，500thalers\'worthofothergoodsfrom

abroad，hewouldgain500thalers。

Itwasalsowellknownbefore，thatworkleadstowealth，and

idlenesstobeggary；thatprivateself-interestisthemost

powerfulstimulustoactiveindustry；andthathewhodesiresto

obtainyoungchickens，mustnotfirsteattheeggs。Certainly

peoplehadnotknownbeforethatallthiswaspoliticaleconomy；

buttheyweredelightedtobeinitiatedwithsolittletroubleinto

thedeepestmysteriesofthescience，andthustogetridofthe

hatefuldutieswhichmakeourfavouriteluxuriessodear，andto

getperpetualpeace，universalbrotherhood，andthemillenniuminto

thebargain。Itisalsonocauseforsurprisethatsomanylearned

menandStateofficialsrankedthemselvesamongtheadmirersof

SmithandSay；fortheprincipleof\'laissezfaireetlaissez

aller\'demandsnosagacityfromanysavethosewhofirstintroduced

andexpoundedit；authorswhosucceededthemhadnothingtodobut

toreiterate，embellish，andelucidatetheirargument；andwho

mightnotfeelthewishandhavetheabilitytobeagreat

statesman，ifallonehadtodowastofoldone\'shandsinone\'s

bosom？Itisastrangepeculiarityofthesesystems，thatoneneed

onlyadopttheirfirstpropositions，andletoneselfbeled

credulouslyandconfidinglybythehandbytheauthor，througha

fewchapters，andOneislost。WemustsaytoM。JeanBaptisteSay

attheoutsetthatpoliticaleconomyisnot，inouropinion，that

sciencewhichteachesonlyhowvaluesinexchangeareproducedby

individuals，distributedamongthem，andconsumedbythem；wesay

tohimthatastatesmanwillknowandmustknow，overandabove

that，howtheproductivepowersofawholenationcanbeawakened，

increased，andprotected，andhowontheotherhandtheyare

weakened，laidtosleep，orutterlydestroyed；andhowbymeansof

thosenationalproductivepowersthenationalresourcescanbe

utilisedinthewisestandbestmannersoastoproducenational

existence，nationalindependence，nationalprosperity，national

strength，nationalculture，andanationalfuture。

Thissystem(ofSay)hasrushedfromoneextremeviewthatthe

Statecanandoughttoregulateeverything——intotheopposite

extreme——thattheStatecanandoughttodonothing：thatthe

individualiseverything，andtheStatenothingatall。Theopinion

ofM。Sayastotheomnipotenceofindividualsandtheimpotenceof

theStatevergesontheridiculous。Wherehecannotforbearfrom

expressingawordofpraiseontheefficacyofColbert\'smeasures

fortheindustrialeducationofFrance，heexclaims，\'Onecould

hardlyhavegivenprivatepersonscreditforsuchahighdegreeof

wisdom。\'

Ifweturnourattentionfromthesystemtoitsauthor，wesee

inhimamanwho，withoutacomprehensiveknowledgeofhistory，

withoutdeepinsightintoStatepolicyorStateadministration，

withoutpoliticalorphilosophicalviews，withmerelyoneidea

adoptedfromothersinhishead，rummagesthroughhistory，

politics，statistics，commercialandindustrialrelations，inorder

todiscoverisolatedproofsandfactswhichmayservetosupport

hisidea。IfanyonewillreadhisremarksontheNavigationLaws，

theMethuenTreaty，thesystemofColbert，theEdenTreaty，&c。he

willfindthisjudgmentconfirmed。Itdidnotsuithimtofollow

outconnectedlythecommercialandindustrialhistoryofnations。

Thatnationshavebecomerichandmightyunderprotectivetariffs

headmits，onlyinhisopiniontheybecamesoinspiteofthat

systemandnotinconsequenceofit；andherequiresthatweshould

believethatconclusiononhiswordalone。Hemaintainsthatthe

DutchwereinducedtotradedirectlywiththeEastIndies，because

PhilipIIforbadethemtoentertheharbourofPortugal；asthough

theprotectivesystemwouldjustifythatprohibition，asthoughthe

DutchwouldnothavefoundtheirwaytotheEastIndieswithoutit。

WithstatisticsandpoliticsM。Sayisasdissatisfiedaswith

history：withtheformerbecausenodoubttheyproducethe

inconvenient\'factswhichhesays\'havesooftenproved

contradictoryofhissystem\'——withthelatterbecausehe

understoodnothingatallofit。Hecannotdesistfromhiswarnings

againstthepitfallsintowhichstatisticalfactsmaymisleadus，

orfromremindingusthatpoliticshavenothingtodowith

politicaleconomy，whichsoundsaboutaswiseasifanyonewereto

maintainthatpewtermustnotbetakenintoaccountinthe

considerationofapewterplatter。

Firstamerchant，thenamanufacturer，thenanunsuccessful

politician，Saylaidholdofpoliticaleconomyjustasamangrasps

atsomenewundertakingwhentheoldonecannotgoonanylonger。

Wehavehisownconfessiononrecord，thathestoodindoubtat

firstwhetherheshouldadvocatethe(so-called)mercantilesystem，

orthesystemoffreetrade。HatredoftheContinentalsystem(of

Napoleon)whichhadruinedhismanufactory，andagainsttheauthor

ofitwhohadturnedhimoutofthemagistracy，determinedhimto

espousethecauseofabsolutefreedomoftrade。

Theterm\'freedom\'inwhateverconnectionitisusedhasfor

fiftyyearspastexercisedamagicalinfluenceinFrance。Henceit

happenedthatSay，undertheEmpireaswellasunderthe

Restoration，belongedtotheOpposition，andthatheincessantly

advocatedeconomy。Thushiswritingsbecamepopularforquiteother

reasonsthanwhattheycontained。Otherwisewoulditnotbe

incomprehensiblethattheirpopularityshouldhavecontinuedafter

thefallofNapoleon，ataperiodwhentheadoptionofSay\'ssystem

wouldinevitablyhaveruinedtheFrenchmanufacturers？Hisfirm

adherencetothecosmopoliticalprincipleundersuchcircumstances

proveshowlittlepoliticalinsightthemanhad。Howinlittlehe

knewtheworld，isshownbyhisfirmbeliefthecosmopolitical

tendenciesofCanningandHuskisson。Onethingonlywaslackingto

hisfame，thatneitherLouisXVIIInorCharlesXmadehimminister

ofcommerceandoffinance。Inthatcasehistorywouldhavecoupled

hisnamewiththatofColbert，theoneasthecreatorofthe

nationalindustry，theotherasitsdestroyer。

Neverhasanyauthorwithsuchsmallmaterialsexercisedsuch

awidescientificterrorismasJ。B。Say；theslightestdoubtasto

theinfallibilityofhisdoctrinewasbrandedasobscurantism；and

evenmenlikeChaptalfearedtheanathemasofthis

politico-economicalPope。Chaptal\'sworkontheindustryofFrance，

fromthebeginningtotheend，isnothingelsethananexposition

oftheeffectsoftheFrenchprotectivesystem；hestatesthat

expressly；hesaysdistinctlythatundertheexistingcircumstances

oftheworld，prosperityforFrancecanonlybehopedforunderthe

systemofprotection。AtthesametimeChaptalendeavoursbyan

articleinpraiseoffreetrade，directlyinoppositiontothe

wholetendencyofhisbook，tosolicitpardonforhisheresyfrom

theschoolofSay。SayimitatedthePapacyevensofarastoits

\'Index。\'Hecertainlydidnotprohibithereticalwritings

individuallybyname，buthewasstricterstill；heprohibitsall，

thenon-hereticalaswellastheheretical；hewarnstheyoung

studentsofpoliticaleconomynottoreadtoomanybooks，asthey

mightthustooeasilybemisledintoerrors；theyoughttoread

onlyafew，butthosegoodbooks，whichmeansinotherwords，\'You

oughtonlytoreadmeandAdamSmith，noothers。\'butthatnonetoo

greatsympathyshouldaccruetotheimmortalfatheroftheschool

fromtheadorationofhisdisciples，hissuccessorandinterpreter

onearthtookgoodcare，for，accordingtoSay，AdamSmith\'sbooks

arefullofconfusion，imperfection，andcontradictions；andhe

clearlygivesustounderstandthatonecanonlylearnfromhimself

\'howoneoughttoreadAdamSmith。\'

Notwithstanding，whenSaywasatthezenithofhisfame，

certainyounghereticsarosewhoattackedthebasisofhissystem

soeffectuallyandsoboldly，thathepreferredprivatelytoreply

tothem，andmeeklytoavoidanypublicdiscussion。Amongthese，

TanneguyduCh鈚el(morethanonceaministerofState)wasthe

mostvigorousandthemostingenious。

\'Selonvous，monchercritique，\'saidSaytoDuCh鈚elina

privateletter，\'ilneresteplusdansmon閏onomiepolitiqueque

desactionssansmotifs，desfaitssansexplication，unecha頽ede

rapportsdontlesextr閙it閟manquentetdontlesanneauxlesplus

importantssontbris閟。Jepartagedoncl\'infortuned\'AdamSmith，

dontundenoscritiquesaditqu\'ilavaitfaitr閠rograder

l\'閏onomiepolitique。\'(4*)Inapostscripttothisletterhe

remarksverynaively，\'Danslesecondarticlequevousannoncez，il

estbieninutilederevenirsurcettepol閙ique，parlaquellenous

pouvionsbienennuyerlepublic。\'

AtthepresentdaytheschoolofSmithandSayhasbeen

explodedinFrance，andtherigidandspiritlessinfluenceofthe

TheoryofExchangeableValueshasbeensucceededbyarevolution

andananarchywhichneitherM。RossinorM。Blanquiareableto

exorcise。TheSaint-SimoniansandtheFourrierists，withremarkable

talentattheirhead，insteadofreformingtheolddoctrines，have

castthementirelyaside，andhaveframedforthemselvesaUtopian

system。Quiterecentlythemostingeniouspersonsamongthemhave

beenseekingtodiscovertheconnectionoftheirdoctrineswith

thoseofthepreviousschools，andtomaketheirideascompatible

withexistingcircumstances。Importantresultsmaybeexpectedfrom

theirlabours，especiallyfromthoseofthetalentedMichel

Chevalier。Theamountoftruth，andofwhatispractically

applicableinourdaywhichtheirdoctrinescontain，consists

chieflyintheirexpoundingtheprincipleoftheconfederationand

theharmonyoftheproductivepowers。Theirannihilationof

individualfreedomandindependenceistheirweakside；withthem

theindividualisentirelyabsorbedinthecommunity，indirect

contradictiontotheTheoryofExchangeableValues，accordingto

whichtheindividualoughttobeeverythingandtheStatenothing。

Itmaybethatthespiritoftheworldistendingtothe

realisationofthestateofthingswhichthesesectsdreamofor

prognosticate；inanycase，however，Ibelievethatmanycenturies

mustelapsebeforethatcanbepossible。Itisgiventonomortal

toestimatetheprogressoffuturecenturiesindiscoveriesandin

theconditionofsociety。EventhemindofaPlatocouldnothave

foretoldthatafterthelapseofthousandsofyearstheinstruments

whichdotheworkofsocietywouldbeconstructedofiron，steel，

andbrass，norcouldthatofaCicerohaveforeseenthatthe

printingpresswouldrenderitpossibletoextendthe

representativesystemoverwholekingdoms，perhapsoverwhole

quartersoftheglobe，andovertheentirehumanrace。Ifmeanwhile

itisgiventoonlyafewgreatmindstoforeseeafewinstancesof

theprogressoffuturethousandsofyears，yettoeveryageis

assigneditsownspecialtask。Butthetaskoftheageinwhichwe

liveappearsnottobetobreakupmankindintoFourrierist

\'phalanst鑢es，\'inordertogiveeachindividualasnearlyas

possibleanequalshareofmentalandbodilyenjoyments，butto

perfecttheproductivepowers，thementalculture，thepolitical

condition，andthepowerofwholenationalities，andbyequalising

themintheserespectsasfarasispossible，topreparethem

beforehandforuniversalunion。Forevenifweadmitthatunderthe

existingcircumstancesoftheworldtheimmediateobjectwhichits

apostleshadinviewcouldbeattainedbyeach\'phalanst鑢e，\'what

wouldbeitseffectonthepowerandindependenceofthenation？

Andwouldnotthenationwhichwasbrokenupinto\'phalanst鑢es，\'

runtheriskofbeingconqueredbysomelessadvancednationwhich

continuedtoliveintheoldway，andofthushavingitspremature

institutionsdestroyedtogetherwithitsentirenationality？At

presenttheTheoryofExchangeableValueshassocompletelylost

itsinfluence，thatitisalmostexclusivelyoccupiedwith

inquiriesintothenatureofRent，andthatRicardoinhis

\'PrinciplesofPoliticalEconomy\'couldwrite，\'Thechiefobjectof

politicaleconomyistodeterminethelawsbywhichtheproduceof

thesoiloughttobesharedbetweenthelandowner，thefarmer，and

thelabourer。\'

Whilesomepersonsarefirmlyconvincedthatthisscienceis

complete，andthatnothingessentialcanfurtherbeaddedtoit，

those，ontheotherhand，whoreadthesewritingswith

philosophicalorpracticalinsight，maintain，thatasyetthereis

nopoliticaleconomyatall，thatthatsciencehasyettobe

constructed；thatuntilitisso，whatgoesbyitsnameismerely

anastrology，butthatitisbothpossibleanddesirableoutofit

toproduceanastronomy。

Finally，wemustremark，inordernottobemisunderstood，that

ourcriticismofthewritingsalikeofJ。B。Sayandofhis

predecessorsandsuccessorsrefersonlytotheirnationaland

internationalbearing；andthatwerecognisetheirvalueas

expositionsofsubordinatedoctrines。Itisevidentthatanauthor

mayformveryvaluableviewsandinductionsonindividualbranches

ofascience，whileallthewhilethebasisofhissystemmaybe

entirelyerroneous。

NOTES：

1。LouisSay，EtudessurlaRichessedesNations，Preface，p。iv。

2。ThefollowingaretheactualwordsofLouisSay(p。10)：\'La

richesseneconsistepasdansleschosesquisatisfontnosbesoins

ounosgo鹴s，maisdanslepouvoird\'enjouirannuellement。\'And

further(pp。14to15)：\'Lefauxsyst鑝emercantil，fond？surla

richesseenm閠auxpr閏ieux，a閠？remplac？parunautrefond？sur

larichesseenvaieursv閚alesou閏hangeables，quiconsiste？

n\'関aiuercequicomposelarichessed\'unenationquecommelefait

unmarchand。\'And(note，p。14)：\'L\'閏olemodernequirefutele

syst鑝emercantilaelle-m阭ecr殚unsyst鑝equilui-m阭edoit

阾reappel？lesyst鑝emercantil。\'

3。EtudessurlaRichessedesNations，p。36(quotingJ。B。Say\'s

words)：\'Quecettem閠hode閠aitloind\'阾rebonne，maisquela

difficult？閠aitd\'entrouvorunemeilleure。\'

4。Say，Courscompletd\'Economiepolitiquepratique，vii。p。378。

EndFourthBook

ThePolitics

Chapter33

TheInsularSupremacyandtheContinentalPowers——NorthAmerica

andFrance

Inallagestherehavebeencitiesorcountrieswhichhavebeen

pre-eminentaboveallothersinindustry，commerce，andnavigation；

butasupremacysuchasthatwhichexistsinourdays，theworld

hasneverbeforewitnessed。Inallages，nationsandpowershave

striventoattaintothedominionoftheworld，buthithertonot

oneofthemhaserecteditspoweronsobroadafoundation。How

vaindotheeffortsofthoseappeartouswhohavestriventofound

theiruniversaldominiononmilitarypower，comparedwiththe

attemptofEnglandtoraiseherentireterritoryintooneimmense

manufacturing，commercial，andmaritimecity，andtobecomeamong

thecountriesandkingdomsoftheearth，thatwhichagreatcityis

inrelationtoitssurroundingterritory。tocomprisewithin

herselfallindustries，arts，andsciences；allgreatcommerceand

wealth；allnavigationandnavalpower——aworld\'smetropolis

whichsuppliesallnationswithmanufacturedgoods，andsupplies

herselfinexchangefromeverynationwiththoserawmaterialsand

agriculturalproductsofausefuloracceptablekind，whicheach

othernationisfittedbynaturetoyieldtoher——a

treasure-houseofallgreatcapital——abankingestablishmentfor

allnations，whichcontrolsthecirculatingmediumofthewhole

world，andbyloansandthereceiptofinterestonthemmakesall

thepeoplesoftheearthhertributaries。Letus，however，do

justicetothisPowerandtoherefforts。Theworldhasnotbeen

hinderedinitsprogress，butimmenselyaidedinit，byEngland。

Shehasbecomeanexampleandapatterntoallnations——in

internalandinforeignpolicy，aswellasingreatinventionsand

enterprisesofeverykind；inperfectingindustrialprocessesand

meansoftransport，aswellasinthediscoveryandbringinginto

cultivationuncultivatedlands，especiallyintheacquisitionof

thenaturalrichesoftropicalcountries，andinthecivilisation

ofbarbarousracesorofsuchashaveretrogradedintobarbarism。

Whocantellhowfarbehindtheworldmightyetremainifno

Englandhadeverexisted？Andifshenowceasedtoexist，whocan

estimatehowfarthehumanracemightretrograde？Letusthen

congratulateourselvesontheimmenseprogressofthatnation，and

wishherprosperityforallfuturetime。Butoughtweonthat

accountalsotowishthatshemayerectauniversaldominiononthe

ruinsoftheothernationalities？Nothingbutunfathomable

cosmopolitanismorshopkeepers\'narrow-mindednesscangivean

assentinganswertothatquestion。Inourpreviouschapterswehave

pointedouttheresultsofsuchdenationalisation，andshownthat

thecultureandcivilisationofthehumanracecanonlybebrought

aboutbyplacingmanynationsinsimilarpositionsofcivilisation，

wealth，andpower；thatjustasEnglandherselfhasraisedherself

fromaconditionofbarbarismtoherpresenthighposition，sothe

samepathliesopenforothernationstofollow：andthatatthis

timemorethanonenationisqualifiedtostrivetoattainthe

highestdegreeofcivilisation，wealth，andpower。Letusnowstate

summarilythemaximsofStatepolicybymeansofwhichEnglandhas

attainedherpresentgreatness。Theymaybebrieflystatedthus：

Alwaystofavourtheimportationofproductivepower，(1*)in

preferencetotheimportationofgoods。

Carefullytocherishandtoprotectthedevelopmentofthe

productivepower。

Toimportonlyrawmaterialsandagriculturalproducts，andto

exportnothingbutmanufacturedgoods。

Todirectanysurplusofproductivepowertocolonisation，and

tothesubjectionofbarbarousnations。

Toreserveexclusivelytothemothercountrythesupplyofthe

coloniesandsubjectcountrieswithmanufacturedgoods，butin

returntoreceiveonpreferentialtermstheirrawmaterialsand

especiallytheircolonialproduce。

Todevoteespecialcaretothecoastnavigation；tothetrade。

Betweenthemothercountryandthecolonies；toencourage

seafisheriesbymeansofbounties；andtotakeasactiveapartas

possibleininternationalnavigation。

Bythesemeanstofoundanavalsupremacy，andbymeansofit

toextendforeigncommerce，andcontinuallytoincreaseher

colonialpossessions。

Tograntfreedomintradewiththecoloniesandinnavigation

onlysofarasshecangainmorebyitthansheloses。

Tograntreciprocalnavigationprivilegesonlyiftheadvantage

isonthesideofEngland，orifforeignnationscanbythatmeans

berestrainedfromintroducingrestrictionsonnavigationintheir

ownfavour。

Tograntconcessionstoforeignindependentnationsinrespect

oftheimportofagriculturalproducts，onlyincaseconcessionsin

respectofherownmanufacturedproductscanbegainedthereby。

Incaseswheresuchconcessionscannotbeobtainedbytreaty，

toattaintheobjectofthembymeansofcontrabandtrade。

Tomakewarsandtocontractallianceswithexclusiveregardto

hermanufacturing，commercial，maritime，andcolonialinterests。To

gainbythesealikefromfriendsandfoes：fromthelatterby

interruptingtheircommerceatsea；fromtheformerbyruining

theirmanufacturesthroughsubsidieswhicharepaidintheshapeof

Englishmanufacturedgoods。

Thesemaximswereinformertimesplainlyprofessedbyall

Englishministersandparliamentaryspeakers。Theministersof

GeorgeIin1721openlydeclared，ontheoccasionofthe

prohibitionoftheimportationofthemanufacturesofIndia，that

itwasclearthatanationcouldonlybecomewealthyandpowerful

ifsheimportedrawmaterialsandexportedmanufacturedgoods。Even

inthetimesofLordsChathamandNorth，theydidnothesitateto

declareinopenParliamentthatitoughtnottobepermittedthat

evenasinglehorse-shoenailshouldbemanufacturedinNorth

America。InAdamSmith\'stime，anewmaximwasforthefirsttime

addedtothosewhichwehaveabovestated，namely，toconcealthe

truepolicyofEnglandunderthecosmopoliticalexpressionsand

argumentswhichAdamSmithhaddiscovered，inordertoinduce

foreignnationsnottoimitatethatpolicy。

Itisaverycommoncleverdevicethatwhenanyonehasattained

thesummitofgreatness，hekicksawaytheladderbywhichhehas

climbedup，inordertodepriveothersofthemeansofclimbingup

afterhim。Inthisliesthesecretofthecosmopoliticaldoctrine

ofAdamSmith，andofthecosmopoliticaltendenciesofhisgreat

contemporaryWilliamPitt，andofallhissuccessorsintheBritish

Governmentadministrations。

Anynationwhichbymeansofprotectivedutiesandrestrictions

onnavigationhasraisedhermanufacturingpowerandhernavigation

tosuchadegreeofdevelopmentthatnoothernationcansustain

freecompetitionwithher，candonothingwiserthantothrowaway

theseladdersofhergreatness，topreachtoothernationsthe

benefitsoffreetrade，andtodeclareinpenitenttonesthatshe

hashithertowanderedinthepathsoferror，andhasnowforthe

firsttimesucceededindiscoveringthetruth。

WilliamPittwasthefirstEnglishstatesmanwhoclearly

perceivedinwhatwaythecosmopoliticaltheoryofAdamSmithcould

beproperlymadeuseof，andnotinvaindidhehimselfcarryabout

acopyoftheworkontheWealthofNations。Hisspeechin1786，

whichwasaddressedneithertoParliamentnortothenation，but

clearlytotheearsofthestatesmenofFrance，whoweredestitute

ofallexperienceandpoliticalinsight，andsolelyintendedto

influencethelatterinfavouroftheEdenTreaty，isanexcellent

specimenofSmith\'sstyleofreasoning。BynaturehesaidFrance

wasadaptedforagricultureandtheproductionofwine，asEngland

wasthusadaptedtomanufacturingproduction。Thesenationsought

toacttowardsoneanotherjustastwogreatmerchantswoulddowho

carryondifferentbranchesoftradeandwhoreciprocallyenrich

oneanotherbytheexchangeofgoods。(2*)Notawordhereofthe

oldmaximofEngland，thatanationcanonlyattaintothehighest

degreeofwealthandpowerinherforeigntradebytheexchangeof

manufacturedproductsagainstagriculturalproductsandraw

materials。Thismaximwasthen，andhasremainedsince，anEnglish

Statesecret；itwasneveragainopenlyprofessed，butwasallthe

morepersistentlyfollowed。If，however，EnglandsinceWilliam

Pitt\'stimehadreallycastawaytheprotectivesystemasauseless

crutch，shewouldnowoccupyamuchhigherpositionthanshedoes，

andshewouldhavegotmuchnearertoherobject，whichisto

monopolisethemanufacturingpowerofthewholeworld。The

favourablemomentforattainingthisobjectwasclearlyjustafter

therestorationofthegeneralpeace。HatredofNapoleon\'s

Continentalsystemhadsecuredareceptionamongallnationsofthe

Continentofthedoctrinesofthecosmopoliticaltheory。Russia，

theentireNorthofEurope，Germany，theSpanishpeninsula，andthe

UnitedStatesofNorthAmericawouldhaveconsideredthemselves

fortunateinexchangingtheiragriculturalproduceandraw

materialsforEnglishmanufacturedgoods。Franceherselfwould

perhapshavefounditpossible，inconsiderationofsomedecided

concessionsinrespectofherwineandsilkmanufactures，todepart

fromherprohibitivesystem。

Thenalsothetimehadarrivedwhen，asPriestleysaidofthe

Englishnavigationlaws，itwouldbejustaswisetorepealthe

Englishprotectivesystemasithadformerlybeentointroduceit。

Theresultofsuchapolicywouldhavebeenthatallthe

surplusrawmaterialsandagriculturalproducefromthetwo

hemisphereswouldhaveflowedovertoEngland，andalltheworld

wouldhaveclothedthemselveswithEnglishfabrics。Allwouldhave

tendedtoincreasethewealthandthepowerofEngland。Undersuch

circumstancestheAmericansortheRussianswouldhardlyhavetaken

itintotheirheadsinthecourseofthepresentcenturyto

introduceaprotectivesystem，ortheGermanstoestablisha

customsunion。Peoplewouldhavecometothedeterminationwith

difficultytosacrificetheadvantagesofthepresentmomenttothe

hopesofadistantfuture。

ButProvidencehastakencarethattreesshouldnotgrowquite

uptothesky。LordCastlereaghgaveoverthecommercialpolicyof

Englandintothehandsofthelandedaristocracy，andthesekilled

thehenwhichhadlaidthegoldeneggs。Hadtheypermittedthe

Englishmanufacturestomonopolisethemarketsofallnations，

GreatBritainwouldhaveoccupiedthepositioninrespecttothe

worldwhichamanufacturingtowndoesinrespecttotheopen

country；thewholeterritoryoftheislandofEnglandwouldhave

beencoveredwithhousesandmanufactories，ordevotedtopleasure

gardens，vegetablegardens，andorchards；totheproductionofmilk

andofmeat，orofthecultivationofmarketproduce，andgenerally

tosuchcultivationasonlycanbecarriedonintheneighbourhood

ofgreatcities。Theproductionofthesethingswouldhavebecome

muchmorelucrativeforEnglishagriculturethantheproductionof

corn，andconsequentlyafteratimetheEnglishlandedaristocracy

wouldhaveobtainedmuchhigherrentsthanbytheexclusionof

foreigngrainfromthehomemarket。Only，thelandedaristocracy

havingonlytheirpresentinterestsinview，preferredbymeansof

thecornlawstomaintaintheirrentsatthehighratetowhich

theyhadbeenraisedbytheinvoluntaryexclusionofforeignraw

materialsandgrainfromtheEnglishmarketwhichhadbeen

occasionedbythewar；andthustheycompelledthenationsofthe

Continenttoseektopromotetheirownwelfarebyanothermethod

thanbythefreeexchangeofagriculturalproduceforEnglish

manufactures，viz。Bythemethodofestablishingamanufacturing

poweroftheirown。TheEnglishrestrictivelawsthusoperated

quiteinthesamewayasNapoleon\'sContinentalsystemhaddone，

onlytheiroperationwassomewhatslower。

WhenCanningandHuskissoncameintooffice，thelanded

aristocracyhadalreadytastedtoomuchoftheforbiddenfruitfor

ittobepossibletoinducethembyreasonsofcommonsenseto

renouncewhattheyhadenjoyed。Thesestatesmenfoundthemselvesin

thedifficultpositionofsolvinganimpossibleproblem——a

positioninwhichtheEnglishministrystillfindsitself。Theyhad

atoneandthesametimetoconvincetheContinentalnationsofthe

advantagesoffreetrade，andalsomaintaintherestrictionsonthe

importofforeignagriculturalproduceforthebenefitofthe

Englishlandedaristocracy。Henceitwasimpossiblethattheir

systemcouldbedevelopedinsuchamannerthatjusticecouldbe

donetothehopesoftheadvocatesoffreetradeonboth

continents。Withalltheirliberalitywithphilanthropicaland

cosmopoliticalphraseswhichtheyutteredingeneraldiscussions

respectingthecommercialsystemsofEnglandandothercountries，

theyneverthelessdidnotthinkitinconsistent，wheneverthe

questionaroseofthealterationofanyparticularEnglishduties，

tobasetheirargumentsontheprincipleofprotection。

Huskissoncertainlyreducedthedutiesonseveralarticles，but

heneveromittedtotakecarethatatthatlowerscaleofdutythe

homemanufactorieswerestillsufficientlyprotected。Hethus

followedprettymuchtherulesoftheDutchwateradministration。

Whereverthewaterontheoutsideriseshigh，thesewise

authoritieserecthighdykes；whereveritrisesless，theyonly

buildlowerdykes。AftersuchafashionthereformoftheEnglish

commercialpolicywhichwasannouncedwithsomuchpompreduced

itselftoapieceofmerepolitico-economicaljugglery。Some

personshaveadducedtheloweringoftheEnglishdutyonsilkgoods

asapieceofEnglishliberality，withoutdulyconsideringthat

Englandbythatmeansonlysoughttodiscouragecontrabandtradein

thesearticlestothebenefitofherfinancesandwithoutinjuryto

herownsilkmanufactories，whichobjectithasalsobythatmeans

perfectlyattained。Butifaprotectivedutyof50to70percent

(whichatthisdayforeignsilkmanufacturershavetopayin

England，includingtheextraduty(3*))istobeacceptedasaproof

ofliberalitymostnationsmayclaimthattheyhaveratherpreceded

theEnglishinthatrespectthanfollowedthem。

AsthedemonstrationsofCanningandHuskissonwerespecially

intendedtoproduceaneffectinFranceandNorthAmerica，itwill

notbeuninterestingtocalltomindinwhatwayitwasthatthey

sufferedshipwreckinbothcountries。Justasformerlyintheyear

1786，soalsoonthisoccasion，theEnglishreceivedgreatsupport

fromthetheorists，andtheliberalpartyinFrance，carriedaway

bythegrandideaofuniversalfreedomoftradeandbySay\'s

superficialarguments，andfromfeelingsofoppositiontowardsa

detestedGovernmentandsupportedbythemaritimetowns，thewine

growers，andthesilkmanufacturers，theliberalpartyclamorously

demanded，astheyhaddoneintheyear1786，extensionofthetrade

withEnglandastheonetruemethodofpromotingthenational

welfare。

Forwhateverfaultspeoplemaylaytothechargeofthe

Restoration，itrenderedanundeniableservicetoFrance，aservice

whichposteritywillnotdispute；itdidnotallowitselftobe

misledintoafalsestepasrespectscommercialpolicyeitherby

thestratagemsoftheEnglishorbytheoutcryoftheliberals。Mr

Canninglaidthisbusinesssomuchtoheartthathehimselfmadea

journeytoParisinordertoconvinceMonsieurVill鑜eofthe

excellenceofhismeasures，andtoinducehimtoimitatethem。M。

Vill鑜ewas，however，muchtoopracticalnottoseecompletely

throughthisstratagem；heissaidtohaverepliedtoMrCanning，

\'IfEnglandinthefaradvancedpositionofherindustrypermits

greaterforeigncompetitionthanformerly，thatpolicycorresponds

toEngland\'sownwell-understoodinterests。Butatthistimeitis

tothewell-understoodinterestsofFrancethatsheshouldsecure

tohermanufactorieswhichhavenotasyetattainedperfect

development，thatprotectionwhichisatpresentindispensableto

themforthatobject。Butwheneverthemomentshallhavearrived

whenFrenchmanufacturingindustrycanbebetterpromotedby

permittingforeigncompetitionthanbyrestrictingit，thenhe(M。

Vill鑜e)wouldnotdelaytoderiveadvantagefromfollowingthe

exampleofMrCanning。\'

Annoyedbythisconclusiveanswer，Canningboastedinopen

Parliamentafterhisreturn，howhehadhungamillstoneonthe

neckoftheFrenchGovernmentbymeansoftheSpanishintervention，

fromwhichitfollowsthatthecosmopolitansentimentsandthe

EuropeanliberalismofMrCanningwerenotspokenquitesomuchin

earnestasthegoodliberalsontheContinentmighthavechosento

believe。ForhowcouldMrCanning，ifthecauseofliberalismon

theContinenthadinterestedhimintheleast，havesacrificedthe

liberalconstitutionofSpaintotheFrenchinterventionowingto

themeredesiretohangamillstoneroundtheneckoftheFrench

Government？Thetruthis，thatMrCanningwaseveryinchan

Englishman，andheonlypermittedhimselftoentertain

philanthropicalorcosmopoliticalsentiments，whentheycouldprove

serviceabletohiminstrengtheningandstillfurtherextendingthe

industryandcommercialsupremacyofEngland，orinthrowingdust

intotheeyesofEngland\'srivalsinindustryandcommerce。

Infact，nogreatsagacitywasneededonthepartofM。Vill鑜e

toperceivethesnarewhichhadbeenlaidforhimbyMrCanning。In

theexperienceofneighbouringGermany，whoaftertheabolitionof

theContinentalsystemhadcontinuallyretrogradedfartherand

fartherinrespectofherindustry，M。Vill鑜epossessedastriking

proofofthetruevalueoftheprincipleofcommercialfreedomas

itwasunderstoodinEngland。AlsoFrancewasprosperingtoowell

underthesystemwhichshehadadoptedsince1815，forhertobe

willingtoattempt，likethedoginthefable，toletgothe

substanceandsnapattheshadow。Menofthedeepestinsightinto

theconditionofindustry，suchasChaptalandCharlesDupin，had

expressedthemselvesontheresultsofthissysteminthemost

unequivocalmanner。

Chaptal\'sworkonFrenchindustryisnothinglessthana

defenceoftheFrenchcommercialpolicy，andanexpositionofits

resultsasawholeandineveryparticular。Thetendencyofthis

workisexpressedinthefollowingquotationfromit。\'Insteadof

losingourselvesinthelabyrinthofmetaphysicalabstractions，we

maintainaboveallthatwhichexists，andseekabovealltomakeit

perfect。Goodcustomslegislationisthebulwarkofmanufacturing

industry。Itincreasesorlessensimportdutiesaccordingto

circumstances；itcompensatesthedisadvantagesofhigherwagesof

labourandofhigherpricesoffuel；itprotectsartsand

industriesintheircradleuntiltheyatlengthbecomestrong

enoughtobearforeigncompetition；itcreatestheindustrial

independenceofFranceandenrichesthenationthroughlabour，

which，asIhavealreadyoftenremarked，isthechiefsourceof

wealth。\'(4*)

CharlesDupinhad，inhiswork\'OntheProductivePowersof

France，andontheProgressofFrenchIndustryfrom1814to1847，\'

thrownsuchaclearlightontheresultsofthecommercialpolicy

whichFrancehadfollowedsincetheRestoration，thatitwas

impossiblethataFrenchministercouldthinkofsacrificingthis

workofhalfacentury，whichhadcostsuchsacrifices，whichwas

sorichinfruits，andsofullofpromiseforthefuture，merely

fortheattractionsofaMethuenTreaty。

TheAmericantarifffortheyear1828wasanaturaland

necessaryresultoftheEnglishcommercialsystem，whichshutout

fromtheEnglishfrontierstheNorthAmericantimber，grain，meal，

andotheragriculturalproducts，andonlypermittedrawcottonto

bereceivedbyEnglandinexchangeforhermanufacturedgoods。On

thissystemthetradewithEnglandonlytendedtopromotethe

agriculturallabouroftheAmericanslaves，whileontheother

hand，thefreest，mostenlightened，andmostpowerfulStatesofthe

Unionfoundthemselvesentirelyarrestedintheireconomical

progress，andthusreducedtodisposeoftheirannualsurplusof

populationandcapitalbyemigrationtothewastelandsofthe

West。MrHuskissonunderstoodthispositionofaffairsverywell。

ItwasnotoriousthattheEnglishambassadorinWashingtonhadmore

thanoncecorrectlyinformedhimoftheinevitableconsequenceof

theEnglishpolicy。IfMrHuskissonhadreallybeenthemanthat

peopleinothercountriessupposedhimtobe，hewouldhavemade

useofthepublicationoftheAmericantariffasavaluable

opportunityformakingtheEnglisharistocracycomprehendthefolly

oftheircornlaws，andthenecessityofabolishingthem。Butwhat

didMrHuskissondo？HefellintoapassionwiththeAmericans(or

atleastaffectedtodoso)，andinhisexcitementhemade

allegations——theincorrectnessofwhichwaswellknowntoevery

Americanplanter——andpermittedhimselftousethreatswhichmade

himridiculous。MrHuskissonsaidtheexportsofEnglandtothe

UnitedStatesamountedtoonlyaboutthesixthpartofallthe

exportsofEngland，whiletheexportsoftheUnitedStatesto

Englandconstitutedmorethanhalfofalltheirexports。Fromthis

hesoughttoprovethattheAmericansweremoreinthepowerofthe

Englishthanthelatterwereinthatoftheformer；andthatthe

Englishhadmuchlessreasontofearinterruptionsoftradethrough

war，cessationofintercourse，andsoforth，thantheAmericans

had。Ifonelooksmerelyatthetotalsofthevalueoftheimports

andexports，Huskisson\'sargumentappearssufficientlyplausible；

butifoneconsidersthenatureofthereciprocalimportsand

exports，itwillthenappearincomprehensiblehowMrHuskisson

couldmakeuseofanargumentwhichprovestheexactoppositeof

thatwhichhedesiredtoprove。Allorbyfarthegreaterpartof

theexportsoftheUnitedStatestoEnglandconsistedofraw

materials，whosevalueisincreasedtenfoldbytheEnglish，and

whichtheycannotdispensewith，andalsocouldnotatonceobtain

fromothercountries，atanyratenotinsufficientquantity，while

ontheotherhandalltheimportsoftheNorthAmericansfrom

Englandconsistedofarticleswhichtheycouldeithermanufacture

forthemselvesorprocurejustaseasilyfromothernations。Ifwe

nowconsiderwhatwouldbetheoperationofaninterruptionof

commercebetweenthetwonationsaccordingtothetheoryofvalues，

itwillappearasifitmustoperatetothedisadvantageofthe

Americans；whereasifwejudgeofitaccordingtothetheoryofthe

productivepowers，itmustoccasionincalculableinjurytothe

English。Forbyittwo-thirdsofalltheEnglishcotton

manufactorieswouldcometoastandstillandfallintoruin。

Englandwouldloseasbymagicaproductivesourceofwealth，the

annualvalueofwhichfarexceedsthevalueofherentireexports，

andtheresultsofsuchalossonthepeace，wealth，credit，

commerce，andpowerofEnglandwouldbeincalculable。What，

however，wouldbetheconsequencesofsuchastateofthingsfor

theNorthAmericans？Compelledtomanufactureforthemselvesthose

goodswhichtheyhadhithertoobtainedfromEngland，theywouldin

thecourseofafewyearsgainwhattheEnglishhadlost。Nodoubt

suchameasuremustoccasionaconflictforlifeanddeath，as

formerlythenavigationlawsdidbetweenEnglandandHolland。But

probablyitwouldalsoendinthesamewayasformerlydidthe

conflictintheEnglishChannel。Itisunnecessaryheretofollow

outtheconsequencesofarivalrywhich，asitappearstous，must

soonerorlater，fromtheverynatureofthings，cometoarupture。

Whatwehavesaidsufficestoshowclearlythefutilityanddanger

ofHuskisson\'sargument，andtodemonstratehowunwiselyEngland

actedincompellingtheNorthAmericans(bymeansofhercornlaws)

tomanufactureforthemselves，andhowwiseitwouldhavebeenof

MrHuskissonhadhe，insteadoftriflingwiththequestionbysuch

futileandhazardousarguments，labouredtoremoveoutoftheway

thecauseswhichledtotheadoptionoftheAmericantariffof

1828。

InordertoprovetotheNorthAmericanshowadvantageousto

themthetradeofEnglandwas，MrHuskissonpointedoutthe

extraordinaryincreaseintheEnglishimportationsofcotton，but

theAmericansalsoknewhowtoestimatethisargumentatitstrue

value。FortheproductionofcottoninAmericahadformorethan

tenyearspreviouslysogreatlyexceededtheconsumptionof，and

thedemandfor，thisarticlefromyeartoyear，thatitspriceshad

falleninalmostthesameratioinwhichtheexporthadincreased；

asmaybeseenfromthefactthatintheyear1816theAmericans

hadobtainedfor80，000，000poundsofcotton24，000，000dollars，

whileintheyear1826for204，000，000poundsofcottontheyonly

obtained25，000，000dollars。

Finally，MrHuskissonthreatenedtheNorthAmericanswiththe

organisationofawholesalecontrabandtradebywayofCanada。It

istruethatunderexistingcircumstancesanAmericanprotective

systemcanbeendangeredbynothingsoseriouslyasbythemeans

indicatedbyMrHuskisson。Butwhatfollowsfromthat？Isitthat

theAmericansaretolaytheirsystematthefeetoftheEnglish

Parliament，andawaitinhumilitywhateverthelattermaybe

pleasedtodeterminefromyeartoyearrespectingtheirnational

industry？Howabsurd！Theonlyconsequencewouldbethatthe

AmericanswouldannexCanadaandincludeitintheirUnion，orelse

assistittoattainindependenceassoonasevertheCanadian

smugglingtradebecameunendurable。Mustwenot，however，deemthe

degreeoffollyabsolutelyexcessiveifanationwhichhasalready

attainedindustrialandcommercialsupremacy，firstofallcompels

anagriculturalnationconnectedwithherbytheclosesttiesof

race，oflanguage，andofinterest，tobecomeherselfa

manufacturingnation，andthen，inordertohinderherfrom

followingtheimpulsethusforciblygiventoher，compelsherto

assistthatnation\'sowncoloniestoattainindependence？

AfterHuskisson\'sdeath，MrPoulettThompsonundertookthe

directionofthecommercialaffairsofEngland；thisstatesman

followedhiscelebratedpredecessorinhispolicyaswellasinhis

office。Inthemeantime，sofarasconcernedNorthAmerica，there

remainedlittleforhimtodo，forinthatcountry，withoutspecial

effortsonthepartoftheEnglish，bymeansoftheinfluenceof

thecottonplantersandtheimporters，andbytheaidofthe

Democraticparty，especiallybymeansoftheso-calledCompromise

Billin1832，amodificationoftheformertariffhadtakenplace，

which，althoughitcertainlyamendedtheexcessesandfaultsofthe

formertariff，andalsostillsecuredtotheAmericanmanufactories

atolerabledegreeofprotectioninrespectofthecoarserfabrics

ofcottonandwoollen，neverthelessgavetheEnglishallthe

concessionswhichtheycouldhavedesiredwithoutEnglandhaving

beencompelledtomakeanycounterconcessions。

SincethepassingofthatBill，theexportsoftheEnglishto

Americahaveenormouslyincreased。Andsubsequentlytothistime

theygreatlyexceedtheEnglishimportsfromNorthAmerica，sothat

atanytimeitisinthepowerofEnglandtodrawtoherselfas

muchasshepleasesofthepreciousmetalscirculatinginAmerica，

andtherebytooccasioncommercialcrisesintheUnitedStatesas

oftenassheherselfisinwantofmoney。Butthemostastonishing

thinginthismatteristhatthatbillhadforitsauthorHenry

Clay，themosteminentandclearsighteddefenderoftheAmerican

manufacturinginterest。Foritmustberememberedthatthe

prosperityoftheAmericanmanufacturerswhichresultedfromthe

tariffof1828excitedsogreatlythejealousyofthecotton

planters，thattheSouthernStatesthreatenedtobringabouta

dissolutionoftheUnionincasethetariffof1828wasnot

modified。TheFederalGovernment，whichwasdominatedbythe

Democraticparty，hadsidedwiththeSouthernplantersfrompurely

partyandelectioneeringmotives，andalsomanagedtogetthe

agriculturistsoftheMiddleandWesternStates，whobelongedto

thatparty，toadoptthesameviews。

Theselasthadlosttheirformersympathywiththe

manufacturinginterestinconsequenceofthehighpricesofproduce

whichhadprevailed，which，however，weretheresultforthemost

partoftheprosperityofthehomemanufactoriesandofthe

numerouscanalsandrailwayswhichwereundertaken。Theymayalso

haveactuallyfearedthattheSouthernStateswouldpresstheir

oppositionsofarastobringaboutarealdissolutionoftheUnion

andevencivilwar。Henceitbecamethepartyinterestsofthe

DemocratsoftheCentralandEasternStatesnottoalienatethe

sympathiesoftheDemocratsoftheSouthernStates。Inconsequence

ofthesepoliticalcircumstances，publicopinionveeredroundso

muchinfavouroffreetradewithEngland，thattherewasreasonto

fearthatallthemanufacturinginterestsofthecountrymightbe

entirelysacrificedinfavourofEnglishfreecompetition。Under

suchcircumstancestheCompromiseBillofHenryClayappearedtobe

theonlymeansofatleastpartiallypreservingtheprotective

system。BythisbillpartoftheAmericanmanufactures，viz。those

offinerandmoreexpensivearticles，wassacrificedtoforeign

competition，inordertopreserveanotherclassofthem，viz。the

manufactureofarticlesofacoarserandalessexpensive

character。Inthemeantimeallappearancesseemtoindicatethat

theprotectivesysteminNorthAmericainthecourseofthenext

fewyearswillagainraiseitsheadandagainmakenewprogress。

HowevermuchtheEnglishmaydesiretolessenandmitigatethe

commercialcrisesinNorthAmerica，howeverlargealsomaybethe

amountofcapitalwhichmaypassoverfromEnglandtoNorthAmerica

intheformofpurchasesofstockorofloansorbymeansof

emigration，theexistingandstillincreasingdisproportionbetween

thevalueoftheexportsandthatofimportscannotpossiblyinthe

longrunbeequalisedbythosemeans。Alarmingcommercialcrises，

whichcontinuallyincreaseintheirmagnitude，mustoccur，andthe

Americansmustatlengthbeledtorecognisethesourcesofthe

evilandtodeterminetoputastoptothem。