按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
Italy； is that of Antonio Serra of Naples （in 1613）； on the means
of providing 'the Kingdoms' with an abundance of gold and silver。
J。 B。 Say and M'Culloch appear to have seen and read only the
title of this book： they each pass it over with the remark that it
merely treats of money； and its title certainly shows that the
author laboured under the error of considering the precious metals
as the sole constituents of wealth。 If they had read farther into
it； and duly considered its contents； they might perhaps have
derived from it some wholesome lessons。 Antonio Serra； although he
fell into the error of considering an abundance of gold and silver
as the tokens of wealth； nevertheless expresses himself tolerably
clearly on the causes of it。
He certainly puts mining in the first place as the direct
source of the precious metals； but he treats very justly of the
indirect means of acquiring them。 Agriculture； manufactures；
commerce； and navigation； are； according to him； the chief sources
of national wealth。 The fertility of the soil is a sure source of
prosperity； manufactures are a still more fruitful source； for
several reasons； but chiefly because they constitute the foundation
of an extensive commerce。 The productiveness of these sources
depends on the characteristic qualifications of the people （viz。
whether they are industrious； active； enterprising； thrifty； and so
forth）； also on the nature and circumstances of the locality
（whether； for instance； a city is well situated for maritime
trade）。 But above all these causes； Serra ranks the form of
government； public order； municipal liberty； political guarantees；
the stability of the laws。 ' No country can prosper；' says he； '
where each successive ruler enacts new laws； hence the States of
the Holy Father cannot be so prosperous as those countries whose
government and legislation are more stable。 In contrast with the
former； one may observe in Venice the effect which a system of
order and legislation； which has continued for centuries； has on
the public welfare。' This is the quintessence of a system of
Political Economy which in the main； notwithstanding that its
object appears to be only the acquisition of the precious metals；
is remarkable for its sound and natural doctrine。 The work of J。 B。
Say； although it comprises ideas and matter on Political Economy of
which Antonio Serra had in his day no foreknowledge； is far
inferior to Serra's on the main points； and especially as respects
a due estimate of the effect of political circumstances on the
wealth of nations。 Had Say studied Serra instead of laying his work
aside； he could hardly have maintained （in the first page of his
system of Political Economy） that 'the constitution of countries
cannot be taken into account in respect to Political Economy； that
the people have become rich； and become poor； under every form of
government； that the only important point is； that its
administration should be good。'
We are far from desiring to maintain the absolute
preferableness of any one form of government compared with others。
One need only cast a glance at the Southern States of America； to
be convinced that democratic forms of government among people who
are not ripe for them can become the cause of decided
retrogression。 in public prosperity。 One need only look at Russia；
to perceive that people who are yet in a low degree of civilisation
are capable of making most remarkable progress in their national
well…being under an absolute monarchy。 But that in no way proves
that people have become rich； i。e。 have attained the highest degree
of economical well…being； under all forms of government。 History
rather teaches us that such a degree of public well…being； namely；
a flourishing state of manufactures and commerce； has been attained
in those countries only whose political constitution （whether it
bear the name of democratic or aristocratic republic； or limited
monarchy） has secured to their inhabitants a high degree of
personal liberty and of security of property whose administration
has guaranteed to them a high degree of activity and power
successfully to strive for the attainment of their common objects；
and of steady continuity in those endeavours。 For in a state of
highly advanced civilisation； it is not so important that the
administration should be good for a certain period； but that it
should be continuously and conformably good； that the next
administration should not destroy the good work of the former one；
that a thirty years' administration of Colbert should not be
followed by a Revocation of the Edict of Nantes； that for
successive centuries one should follow one and the same system； and
strive after one and the same object。 Only under those political
constitutions in which the national interests are represented （and
not under an absolute Government； under which the State
administration is necessarily always modified according to the
individual will of the ruler） can such a steadiness and consistency
of administration be secured； as Antonio Serra rightly observes。 On
the other hand； there are undoubtedly certain grades of
civilisation in which the administration by absolute power may
prove far more favourable to the economical and mental progress of
the nation （and generally is so） than that of a limited monarchy。
We refer to periods of slavery and serfdom； of barbarism and
superstition； of national disunity； and of caste privileges。 For；
under such circumstances； the constitution tends to secure not only
the interests of the nation； but also the continuance of the
prevailing evils； whereas it is the interest and the nature of
absolute government to destroy the latter； and it is also possible
that an absolute ruler may arise of distinguished power and
sagacity； who may cause the nation to make advances for centuries；
and secure to its nationality existence and progress for all future
time。
It is consequently only a conditional commonplace truth on the
faith of which J。 B。 Say would exclude politics from his doctrine。
In every case it is the chief desideratum that the administration
should be good； but the efficiency of the administration depends on
the form of government； and that form of government is clearly the
best which most promotes the moral and material welfare and the
future progress of any given nation。 Nations have made some
progress un der all forms of government。 But a high degree of
economical development has only been attained in those nations
whose form of government has been such