list3-第3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！





henceforth　principally　levied　on　the　imported　manufactured　goods。



The　benefits　offered　by　the　latter　policy　stimulated　the　merchants；



seamen；　and　manufacturers　of　more　highly　civilised　cities　and



countries　to　immigrate　with　their　capital　into　the　great



monarchies；　and　stimulated　the　spirit　of　enterprise　of　the　subjects



of　the　latter。　The　growth　of　the　national　industry　was　followed　by



the　growth　of　the　national　freedom。　The　feudal　aristocracy　found　it



necessary　in　their　own　interest　to　make　concessions　to　the



industrial　and　commercial　population；　as　well　as　to　those　engaged



in　agriculture；　hence　resulted　progress　in　agriculture　as　well　as



in　native　industry　and　native　commerce；　which　had　a　reciprocally



favourable　influence　on　those　two　other　factors　of　national　wealth。



We　have　shown　how　England；　in　consequence　of　this　system；　and



favoured　by　the　Reformation；　made　forward　progress　from　century　to



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



little　as　possible。



　　　　As　respects　the　former　objection；　it　cannot　be　truly　alleged　of



either　Colbert's　administration　or　of　that　of　the　English　since



George　I。　that　they　have　attached　an　unreasonable　degree　of



importance　to　the　importation　of　the　precious　metals。



　　　　To　raise　their　own　native　manufactures；　their　own　navigation；



their　foreign　trade；　was　the　aim　of　their　commercial　policy；　which



indeed　was　chargeable　with　many　mistakes；　but　which　on　the　whole



produced　important　results。　We　have　observed　that　since　the　Methuen



Treaty　（1703）　the　English　have　annually　exported　great　quantities



of　the　precious　metals　to　the　East　Indies；　without　considering



these　exports　as　prejudicial。



　　　　The　Ministers　of　George　I　when　they　prohibited　（in　1721）　the



importation　of　the　cotton　and　silk　fabrics　of　India　did　not　assign



as　a　reason　for　that　measure　that　a　nation　ought　to　sell　as　much　as



possible　to　the　foreigner；　and　buy　as　little　as　possible　from　him；



that　absurd　idea　was　grafted　on　to　the　industrial　system　by　a



subsequent　school；　what　they　asserted　was；　that　it　is　evident　that



a　nation　can　only　attain　to　wealth　and　power　by　the　export　of　its



own　manufactured　goods；　and　by　the　import　from　abroad　of　raw



materials　and　the　necessaries　of　life。　England　has　followed　this



maxim　of　State　policy　to　the　present　day；　and　by　following　it　has



become　rich　and　mighty；　this　maxim　is　the　only　true　one　for　a



nation　which　has　been　long　civilised；　and　which　has　already　brought



its　own　agriculture　to　a　high　degree　of　development。







NOTES：







1。　Stewart　says　（book　1。　chapter　xxix。）：　'In　order　to　promote



industry；　a　nation　must　act　as　well　as　permit；　and　protect。　Could



ever　the　woollen　manufacture　have　been　introduced　into　France　from



the　consideration　of　the　great　advantage　which　England　had　drawn



from　it。　if　the　king　had　not　undertaken　the