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！
but they were delighted to be initiated with so little trouble into
the deepest mysteries of the science； and thus to get rid of the
hateful duties which make our favourite luxuries so dear； and to
get perpetual peace； universal brotherhood； and the millennium into
the bargain。 It is also no cause for surprise that so many learned
men and State officials ranked themselves among the admirers of
Smith and Say； for the principle of 'laissez faire et laissez
aller' demands no sagacity from any save those who first introduced
and expounded it； authors who succeeded them had nothing to do but
to reiterate； embellish； and elucidate their argument； and who
might not feel the wish and have the ability to be a great
statesman； if all one had to do was to fold one's hands in one's
bosom？ It is a strange peculiarity of these systems； that one need
only adopt their first propositions； and let oneself be led
credulously and confidingly by the hand by the author； through a
few chapters； and One is lost。 We must say to M。 Jean Baptiste Say
at the outset that political economy is not； in our opinion； that
science which teaches only how values in exchange are produced by
individuals； distributed among them； and consumed by them； we say
to him that a statesman will know and must know； over and above
that； how the productive powers of a whole nation can be awakened；
increased； and protected； and how on the other hand they are
weakened； laid to sleep； or utterly destroyed； and how by means of
those national productive powers the national resources can be
utilised in the wisest and best manner so as to produce national
existence； national independence； national prosperity； national
strength； national culture； and a national future。
This system （of Say） has rushed from one extreme view that the
State can and ought to regulate everything into the opposite
extreme that the State can and ought to do nothing： that the
individual is everything； and the State nothing at all。 The opinion
of M。 Say as to the omnipotence of individuals and the impotence of
the State verges on the ridiculous。 Where he cannot forbear from
expressing a word of praise on the efficacy of Colbert's measures
for the industrial education of France； he exclaims； 'One could
hardly have given private persons credit for such a high degree of
wisdom。'
If we turn our attention from the system to its author； we see
in him a man who； without a comprehensive knowledge of history；
without deep insight into State policy or State administration；
without political or philosophical views； with merely one idea
adopted from others in his head； rummages through history；
politics； statistics； commercial and industrial relations； in order
to discover isolated proofs and facts which may serve to support
his idea。 If anyone will read his remarks on the Navigation Laws；
the Methuen Treaty； the system of Colbert； the Eden Treaty； &c。 he
will find this judgment confirmed。 It did not suit him to follow
out connectedly the commercial and industrial history of nations。
That nations have become rich and mighty under protective tariffs
he admits； only in his opinion they became so in spite of that
system and not in consequence of it； and he requires that we should
believe that conclusion on his word alone。 He maintains that the
Dutch were induced to trade directly with the East Indies； because
Philip II forbade them to enter the harbour of Portugal； as though
the protective system would justify that prohibition； as though the
Dutch would not have found their way to the East Indies without it。
With statistics and politics M。 Say is as dissatisfied as with
history： with the former because no doubt they produce the
inconvenient 'facts which he says 'have so often proved
contradictory of his system' with the latter because he
understood nothing at all of it。 He cannot desist from his warnings
against the pitfalls into which statistical facts may mislead us；
or from reminding us that politics have nothing to do with
political economy； which sounds about as wise as if anyone were to
maintain that pewter must not be taken into account in the
consideration of a pewter platter。
First a merchant； then a manufacturer； then an unsuccessful
politician； Say laid hold of political economy just as a man grasps
at some new undertaking when the old one cannot go on any longer。
We have his own confession on record； that he stood in doubt at
first whether he should advocate the （so…called） mercantile system；
or the system of free trade。 Hatred of the Continental system （of
Napoleon） which had ruined his manufactory； and against the author
of it who had turned him out of the magistracy； determined him to
espouse the cause of absolute freedom of trade。
The term 'freedom' in whatever connection it is used has for
fifty years past exercised a magical influence in France。 Hence it
happened that Say； under the Empire as well as under the
Restoration； belonged to the Opposition； and that he incessantly
advocated economy。 Thus his writings became popular for quite other
reasons than what they contained。 Otherwise would it not be
incomprehensible that their popularity should have continued after
the fall of Napoleon； at a period when the adoption of Say's system
would inevitably have ruined the French manufacturers？ His firm
adherence to the cosmopolitical principle under such circumstances
proves how little political insight the man had。 How in little he
knew the world； is shown by his firm belief the cosmopolitical
tendencies of Canning and Huskisson。 One thing only was lacking to
his fame； that neither Louis XVIII nor Charles X made him minister
of commerce and of finance。 In that case history would have coupled
his name with that of Colbert； the one as the creator of the
national industry； the other as its destroyer。
Never has any author with such small materials exercised such
a wide scientific terrorism as J。 B。 Say； the slightest doubt as to
the infallibility of his doctrine was branded as obscurantism； and
even men like Chaptal feared the anathemas of this
politico…economical Pope。 Chaptal's work on the industry of France；
from the beginning to the end； is nothing else than an exposition
of the effects of the French protective system； he states that
expressly； he says distinctly that under the existing circumstances
of the world； prosperity for France can only be hoped for under the
system of protection。 At the same time Chaptal endeavours by an
article in praise of free trade； directly in opposition to the