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！
century in the development of her productive power； freedom； and
might。 We have stated how in France this system was followed for
some time with success； but how it came to grief there； because the
institutions of feudalism； of the priesthood； and of the absolute
monarchy； had not yet been reformed。 We have also shown how the
Polish nationality succumbed； because the elective system of
monarchy did not possess influence and steadiness enough to bring
into existence powerful municipal institutions； and to reform the
feudal aristocracy。 As a result of this policy； there was created
in the place of the commercial and manufacturing city； and of the
agricultural province which chiefly existed outside the political
influence of that city； the agricultural…manufacturing…commercial
State； a nation complete in itself； an harmonious and compact
whole； in which； on the one hand； the formerly prevailing
differences between monarchy； feudal aristocracy； and citizenhood
gave place to one harmonious accord； and； on the other hand； the
closest union and reciprocally beneficial action took place between
agriculture； manufactures； and commerce。 This was an immeasurably
more perfect commonwealth than the previously existing one； because
the manufacturing power； which in the municipal republic had been
confined to a narrow range； now could extend itself over a wider
sphere； because now all existing resources were placed at its
disposition； because the division of labour and the confederation
of the productive powers in the different branches of manufactures；
as well as in agriculture； were made effectual in an infinitely
greater degree； because the numerous classes of agriculturists
became politically and commercially united with the manufacturers
and merchants； and hence perpetual concord was maintained between
them； the reciprocal action between manufacturing and commercial
power was perpetuated and secured for ever； and finally； the
agriculturists were made partakers of all the advantages of
civilisation arising from manufactures and commerce。 The
agricultural…manufacturing…commercial State is like a city which
spreads over a whole kingdom； or a country district raised up to be
a city。 In the same proportion in which material production was
promoted by this union； the mental powers must necessarily have
been developed； the political institutions perfected； the State
revenues； the national military power； and the population；
increased。 Hence we see at this day； that nation which first of all
perfectly developed the agricultural； manufacturing； and commercial
State； standing in these respects at the head of all other nations。
The Industrial System was not defined in writing； nor was it a
theory devised by authors； it was simply acted upon in practice；
until the time of Stewart； who deduced it for the most part from
the actual English practice； just as Antonio Serra deduced his
system from a consideration of the circumstances of Venice。
Stewart's treatise； however； cannot be considered a scientific
work。 The greater part of it is devoted to money； banking； the
paper circulation commercial crises the balance of trade； and
the doctrine of population： discussions from which even in our
day much may be learned； but which are carried on in a very
illogical and unintelligible way； and in which one and the same
idea is ten times repeated。 The other branches of political economy
are either superficially treated； or passed over altogether。
Neither the productive powers； nor the elements of price； are
thoroughly discussed。 Everywhere the author appears to have in view
only the experiences and circumstances of England。 In a word； his
book possesses all the merits and demerits of the practice of
England； and of that of Colbert。 The merits of the Industrial
System as compared with later ones； are：
1。 That it clearly recognises the value of native manufactures
and their influence on native agriculture； commerce； and
navigation； and on the civilisation and power of the nation； and
expresses itself unreservedly to that effect。
2。 That it indicates what is in general the right means whereby
a nation which is qualified for establishing a manufacturing power；
may attain a national industry。（1*）
3。 That it is based on the idea of 'the nation；' and regarding
the nations as individual entities； everywhere takes into account
the national interests and national conditions。
On the other hand； this system is chargeable with the following
chief faults：
1。 That it does not generally recognise the fundamental
principle of the industrial development of the nation and the
conditions under which it can be brought into operation。
2。 That it consequently would mislead peoples who live in a
climate unsuited for manufacturing； and small and uncivilised
states and peoples； into the adoption of the protective system。
3。 That it always seeks to apply protection to agriculture； and
especially to the production of raw materials to the injury of
agriculture whereas agricultural industry is sufficiently
protected against foreign competition by the nature of things。
4。 That it seeks to favour manufactures unjustly by imposing
restrictions on the export of raw materials； to the detriment of
agriculture。
5。 That it does not teach the nation which has already attained
manufacturing and commercial supremacy to preserve her own
manufacturers and merchants from indolence； by permitting free
competition in her own markets。
6。 That in the exclusive pursuit of the political object； it
ignores the cosmopolitical relations of all nations； the objects of
the whole human race； and hence would mislead governments into a
prohibitory system； where a protective one would amply suffice； or
imposing duties which are practically prohibitory； when moderate
protective duties would better answer the purpose。
Finally。
7。 That chiefly owing to his utterly ignoring the principle of
cosmopolitanism； it does not recognise the future union of all
nations； the establishment of perpetual peace； and of universal
freedom of trade； as the goal towards which all nations have to
strive； and more and more to approach。
The subsequent schools have； however； falsely reproached this
system for considering the precious metals as the sole constituents
of wealth； whereas they are merely merchandise like all other
articles of value； and that hence it would follow that we ought to
sell as much as possible to other nations and to buy from them as