list3-第2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！





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　as　to　secure　to　them　a　high



degree　of　freedom　and　power；　of　steadiness　of　laws　and　of　policy；



and　efficient　institutions。



　　　　Antonio　Serra　sees　the　nature　of　things　as　it　actually　exists；



and　not　through　the　spectacles　of　previous　systems；　or　of　some　one



principle　which　he　is　determined　to　advocate　and　carry　out。　He



draws　a　comparison　between　the　condition　of　the　various　States　of



Italy；　and　perceives　that　the　greatest　degree　of　wealth　is　to　be



found　where　there　is　extensive　commerce；　that　extensive　commerce



exists　where　there　is　a　well…developed　manufacturing　power；　but



that　the　latter　is　to　be　found　where　there　is　municipal　freedom。



　　　　The　opinions　of　beccaria　are　pervaded　by　the　false　doctrines　of



the　physiocratic　school。　That　author　indeed　either　discovered；　or



derived　from　Aristotle；　the　principle　of　the　division　of　labour；



either　before；　or　contemporaneously　with；　Adam　Smith；　he；　however；



carries　it　farther　than　Adam　Smith；　inasmuch　as　he　not　only　applies



it　to　the　division　of　the　work　in　a　single　manufactory；　but　shows



that　the　public　welfare　is　promoted　by　the　division　of　occupation



among　the　members　of　the　community。　At　the　same　time　he　does　not



hesitate；　with　the　physiocrats；　to　assert　that　manufactures　are



non…productive。



　　　　The　views　of　the　great　philosophical　jurist；　Filangieri；　are



about　the　narrowest　of　all。　Imbued　with　false　cosmopolitanism；　he



considers　that　England；　by　her　protective　policy；　has　merely　given



a　premium　to　contraband　trade；　and　weakened　her　own　commerce。



　　　　Verri；　as　a　practical　statesman；　could　not　err　so　widely　as



that。　He　admits　the　necessity　of　protection　to　native　industry



against　foreign　competition；　but　did　not　or　could　not　see　that　such



a　policy　is　conditional　on　the　greatness　and　unity　of　the



nationality。







NOTES：







1。　During　a　journey　in　Germany　which　the　author　undertook　while



this　work　was　in　the　press；　he　learned　for　the　first　time　that



Doctors　Von　Ranke　and　Gervinus　have　criticised　Macchiavelli's



Prince　from　the　same　point　of　view　as　himself。







2。　Everything　that　Macchiavelli　has　written；　whether　before　or



after　the　publication　of　the　Prince；　indicates　that　he　was



revolving　in　his　mind　plans　of　this　kind。　How　otherwise　can　it　be



explained；　why　he；　a　civilian；　a　man　of　letters；　an　ambassador　and



State　official；　who　had　never　borne　arms；　should　have　occupied



himself　so　much　in　studying　the　art　of　war；　and　that　he　should　have



been　able　to　write　a　work　upon　it　which　excited　the　wonder　of　the



most　distinguished　soldiers　of　his　time？







3。　Frederick　the　Great　in　his　Anti…Macchiavel　treats　of　the　Prince



as　simply　a　scientific　treatise　on　the　rights　and　duties　of　princes



generally。　Here　it　is　remarkable　that　he；　while　contradicting



Macchiavelli　chapter　by　chapter；　never　mentions　the　last　or



twenty…sixth　chapter；　which　bears　the　heading；　'A　Summons　to　free



Italy　from　the　Foreigners；'　and　instead　of　it　inserts　a　chapter



which　is　not　contained　in　Macchiavelli's　work　with　the　heading；　'On



the　different　kinds　of　Negotiations；　and　On　the　just　Reasons　for　a



Declaration　of　War。'







4。　First　published　in　the　work；　Pensieri　intorno　allo　scopo　di



Nicolo　Macchiavelli　nel　libro　'Il　Principe。'　Milano；　1810。







Chapter　29







The　Industrial　System　（Falsely　Termed　by　the　School　'The　Mercantile



System'）







　　　　At　the　period　when　great　nationalities　arose；　owing　to　the



union　of　entire　peoples　brought　about　by　hereditary　monarchy　and　by



the　centralisation　of　public　power；　commerce　and　navigation；　and



hence　wealth　and　naval　power；　existed　for　the　most　part　（as　we　have



before　shown）　in　republics　of　cities；　or　in　leagues　of　such



republics。　The　more；　however；　that　the　institutions　of　these　great



nationalities　became　developed；　the　more　evident　became　the



necessity　of　establishing　on　their　own　territories　these　main



sources　of　power　and　of　wealth。



　　　　Under　the　conviction　that　they　could　only　take　root　and



flourish　under　municipal　liberty；　the　royal　power　favoured



municipal　freedom　and　the　establishment　of　guilds；　both　which　it



regarded　as　counterpoises　against　the　feudal　aristocracy；　who　were



continually　striving　for　independence；　and　always　hostile　to



national　unity。　But　this　expedient　appeared　insufficient；　for　one



reason；　because　the　total　of　the　advantages　which　individuals



enjoyed　in　the　free　cities　and　republics　was　much　greater　than　the



total　of　those　advantages　which　the　monarchical　governments　were



able　to　offer；　or　chose　to　offer；　in　their　own　municipal　cities；　in



the　second　place；　because　it　is　very　difficult；　indeed　impossible；



for　a　country　which　has　always　been　principally　engaged　in



agriculture；　successfully　to　displace　in　free　competition　those



countries　which　for　centuries　have　acquired　supremacy　in



manufactures；　commerce；　and　navigation；　lastly；　because　in　the



great　monarchies　the　feudal　institutions　acted　as　hindrances　to　the



development　of　their　internal　agriculture；　and　consequently　to　the



growth　of　their　internal　manufactures。　Hence；　the　nature　of　things



led　the　great　monarchies　to　adopt　such　political　measures　as　tended



to　restrict　the　importation　of　foreign　manufactured　goods；　and



foreign　commerce　and　navigation；　and　to　favour　the　progress　of



their　own　manufactures；　and　their　own　commerce　and　navigation。



　　　　Instead　of　raising　revenue　as　they　had　previously　done　by



duties　on　the　raw　materials　which　they　exported；　they　were



henceforth　principally　levied　on　the　imported　manufactured　goods。



The　bene