list3-第1部分

快捷操作: 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! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！











Third　Book







The　Systems











Chapter　28







The　National　Economists　of　Italy







　　　　Italy　has　been　the　forerunner　of　all　modern　nations；　in　the



theory　as　well　as　in　the　practice　of　Political　Economy。　Count



Pechio　has　given　us　a　laboriously　written　sketch　of　that　branch　of



Italian　literature；　only　his　book　is　open　to　the　observation；　that



he　has　clung　too　slavishly　to　the　popular　theory；　and　has　not　duly



set　forth　the　fundamental　causes　of　the　decline　of　Italy's　national



industry　　the　absence　of　national　unity；　surrounded　as　she　was　by



great　nationalities　united　under　hereditary　monarchies；　further；



priestly　rule　and　the　downfall　of　municipal　freedom　in　the　Italian



republics　and　cities。　If　he　had　more　deeply　investigated　these



causes；　he　could　not　have　failed　to　apprehend　the　special　tendency



of　the　'Prince'　of　Macchiavelli；　and　he　would　not　have　passed　that



author　by　with　merely　an　incidental　reference　to　him。（1*）



　　　　Through　a　remark　of　Pechio；　that　Macchiavelli　in　a　letter　to



his　friend　Guicciardini　（in　1525）　had　proposed　a　union　of　all　the



Powers　of　Italy　against　the　foreigner；　and　that　as　that　letter　was



communicated　to　Pope　Clement　VII　he　had　thus　exercised　considerable



influence　in　the　formation　of　the　'Holy　League'　（in　1526）；　we　were



led　to　imagine　that　the　same　tendency　must　underlie　the　'Prince。'



As　soon　as　we　referred　to　that　work；　we　found　our　anticipation



confirmed　at　first　sight。　The　object　of　the　'Prince'　（written　in



1513）　was　clearly　to　impress　the　Medici　with　the　idea；　that　they



were　called　upon　to　unite　the　whole　of　Italy　under　one　sovereignty；



and　to　indicate　to　them　the　means　whereby　that　end　might　be



attained。　The　title　and　form　of　that　book；　as　though　its　general



intention　was　to　treat　of　the　nature　of　absolute　government；　were



undoubtedly　selected　from　motives　of　prudence。　It　only　alludes



incidentally　to　the　various　hereditary　Princes　and　their



governments。　Everywhere　the　author　has　in　view　only　one　Italian



usurper。　Principalities　must　be　overthrown；　dynasties　destroyed；



the　feudal　aristocracy　brought　under　subjection；　liberty　in　the



republics　rooted　out。　The　virtues　of　heaven　and　the　artifices　of



hell；　wisdom　and　audacity；　valour　and　treachery；　good　fortune　and



chance；　must　all　be　called　forth；　made　use　of；　and　tried　by　the



usurper；　in　order　to　found　an　Italian　empire。　And　to　this　end　a



secret　is　confided　to　him；　the　power　of　which　has　been　thoroughly



made　manifest　three　hundred　years　later　　a　national　army　must　be



created；　to　whom　victory　must　be　assured　by　new　discipline　and　by



newly　invented　arms　and　manoeuvres。（2*）



　　　　If　the　general　character　of　his　arguments　leaves　room　for　doubt



as　to　the　special　bias　of　this　author；　such　doubt　will　be　removed



by　his　last　chapter。　There　he　plainly　declares　that　foreign



invasions　and　internal　divisions　are　the　fundamental　causes　of　all



the　evils　prevailing　in　Italy；　that　the　House　of　the　Medici；　under



whose　dominion　were　（fortunately）　Tuscany　and　the　States　of　the



Church；　were　called　by　Providence　itself　to　accomplish　that　great



work；　that　the　present　was　the　best　time　and　opportunity　for



introducing　a　new　r間ime；　that　now　a　new　Moses　must　arise　to



deliver　his　people　from　the　bondage　of　Egypt；　that　nothing



conferred　on　a　Prince　more　distinction　and　fame　than　great



enterprises。（3*）



　　　　That　anyone　may　read　between　the　lines　the　tendency　of　that



book　in　the　other　chapters　also；　may　be　best　seen　by　the　manner　in



which　the　author　in　his　ninth　chapter　speaks　of　the　States　of　the



Church。　It　is　merely　an　irony　when　he　says；　'The　priests　possessed



lands　but　did　not　govern　them；　they　held　lordships　but　did　not



defend　them；　these　happiest　of　all　territories　were　directly



protected　by　God's　Providence；　it　would　be　presumption　to　utter　a



criticism　upon　them。'　He　clearly　by　this　language　meant　it　to　be



understood　without　saying　so　in　plain　words：　This　country　presents



no　special　impediment　to　a　bold　conqueror；　especially　to　a　Medici



whose　relative　occupies　the　Papal　chair。



　　　　But　how　can　we　explain　the　advice　which　Macchiavelli　gives　to



his　proposed　usurper　respecting　the　republics；　considering　his　own



republican　sentiments？　And　must　it　be　solely　attributed　to　a　design



on　his　part　to　ingratiate　himself　with　the　Prince　to　whom　his　book



is　dedicated；　and　thus　to　gain　private　advantages；　when　he；　the



zealous　republican；　the　great　thinker　and　literary　genius；　the



patriotic　martyr；　advised　the　future　usurper　utterly　to　destroy　the



freedom　of　the　Italian　republics？　It　cannot　be　denied　that



Macchiavelli；　at　the　time　when　he　wrote　the　'Prince；'　was



languishing　in　poverty；　that　he　regarded　the　future　with　anxiety；



that　he　earnestly　longed　and　hoped　for　employment　and　support　from



the　Medici。　A　letter　which　he　wrote　on　October　10；　1513；　from　his



poor　dwelling　in　the　country　to　his　friend　Bettori；　at　Florence；



places　that　beyond　doubt。（4*）



　　　　Nevertheless；　there　are　strong　reasons　for　believing　that　he　by



this　book　did　not　merely　design　to　flatter　the　Medici；　and　to　gain



private　advantage；　but　to　promote　the　realisation　of　a　plan　of



usurpation；　a　plan　which　was　not　opposed　to　his



republican…patriotic　ideas；　though　according　to　the　moral　ideas　of



our　day　it　must　be　condemned　as　reprehensible　and　wicked。　His



writings　and　his　deeds　in　the　service　of　the　State　prove　that



Macchiavelli　was　thoroughly　acquainted　with　the　history　of　all



periods；　and　with　the　political　condition　of　all　States。　But　an　eye



which　could　see　so　far　backwards；　and　so　clearly　what　was　around



it；　must　also　have　been　able　to　see　far　into　the　future。　A　spirit



which　even　at　the　beginning　of　the　sixteenth　century　recognised　the



advantage　of　the　national　arming　of　Italy；　must　also　have　seen　that



the　time　for　small　republics　was　past；　that　the　period　for　great



monarchies　had　arrived；　that　nationality　could；　under　the



circumstances　then　existing；　be　won　only　by　means　of　usurpation；



and　maintained　only　by　despotism；　that　the　oligarchies　as　they　then



existed　in　the　Italian　republics　constituted　the　greatest　obstacle



to　national　unity；　that　consequently　they　must　be　destroyed；　and



that　national　freedom　would　one　day　grow　out　of　national　unity。



Macchiavelli　evidently　desired　to　cast　away　the　worn…out　liberty　of



a　few　cities　as　a　prey　to　despotism；　hoping　by　its　aid　to　acquire



national　union；　and　thus　to　insure　to　future　generations　freedom　on



a　greater　and　a　nobler　scale。



　　　　The　earliest　work　written　specially　on　Political　Economy　in



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　Econo