political economy-第2章

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！


appiness；　not　in　pointing　out　to　governments　the　laws　by　which　the　increase　of　those　riches　may　be　favoured　or　retarded。　The　attention　of　thinking　men　was　at　length　directed　to　national　wealth　by　the　requisitions　of　states；　and　the　poverty　of　the　people。　An　important　change　which　occurred　in　the　general　politics　of　Europe；　during　the　sixteenth　century；　almost　every　where　overturned　public　liberty；　oppressed　the　smaller　states；　destroyed　the　privileges　of　the　towns　and　provinces；　and　conferred　the　right　to　dispose　of　national　fortunes　on　a　small　number　of　sovereigns；　absolutely　unacquainted　with　the　industry　by　which　wealth　is　accumulated　or　preserved。　Before　the　reign　of　Charles　V；　one　half　of　Europe；　lying　under　the　feudal　system；　had　no　liberty　or　knowledge；　and　no　finance。　But　the　other　half；　which　had　already　reached　a　high　degree　of　prosperity；　which　was　daily　increasing　its　agricultural　riches；　its　manufactories；　and　its　trade；　was　governed　by　men　who；　in　private　life；　had　attended　to　the　study　of　economy；　when；　in　acquiring　their　own　property；　had　learned　what　is　suitable　in　that　of　states；　and　who；　governing　free　communities　to　which　they　were　responsible；　guided　their　administrations；　not　according　to　their　own　ambition；　but　according　to　the　interest　of　all。　Till　the　fifteenth　century　wealth　and　credit　were　no　where　to　be　found　in　the　republics　of　Italy；　and　of　the　Hanseatic　league；　the　imperial　towns　of　Germany；　the　free　towns　of　Belgium　and　Spain；　and　perhaps　also　in　some　towns　in　France　and　England；　which　happened　to　enjoy　great　municipal　privileges。　The　Magistrates　of　all　those　towns　were　men　constantly　brought　up　in　business；　and　without　having　brought　political　economy　to　the　form　of　a　science；　they　had　yet　the　feeling　as　well　as　the　experience　of　what　would　serve　or　injure　the　interests　of　their　fellow…citizens。　　　　　The　dreadful　wars　which　began　with　the　nineteenth　century；　and　altogether　overturned　the　balance　of　Europe；　transferred　a　nearly　absolute　monarchy　to　three　or　four　all…powerful　monarchs；　who　shared　among　them　the　government　of　the　civilized　world。　Charles　V　united；　under　his　dominion；　all　the　counties　which　had　hitherto　been　celebrated　for　their　industry　and　wealth；　…　Spain；　nearly　all　Italy；　Flanders；　and　Germany；　but　he　united　after　having　ruined　them；　and　his　administration；　by　suppressing　all　their　privileges；　prevented　the　recovery　of　former　opulence。　The　most　absolute　kings　can　no　more　govern　by　themselves；　than　kings　whose　authority　is　limited　by　laws。　The　former　transmit　their　power　to　ministers　whom　they　themselves　select；　in　place　of　taking　such　as　would　be　nominated　by　the　popular　confidence。　But　they　find　them　among　a　class　of　persons　different　from　that　in　which　free　governments　find　them。　In　the　eyes　of　an　absolute　king；　the　first　quality　of　a　statesman　is　his　being　in　possession　of　a　rank　so　high　that　he　may　have　lived　in　noble　indolence；　or　at　least　in　absolute　ignorance　of　domestic　economy。　The　ministers　of　Charles　V；　whatever　talents　they　show　for　negotiation　and　intrigue；　were　all　equally　ignorant　of　pecuniary　affairs。　They　ruined　the　public　finances；　agriculture；　trade；　and　every　kind　of　industry；　from　one　end　of　Europe　to　the　other；　they　made　the　people　feel　the　difference；　which　might　indeed　have　been　anticipated；　between　their　ignorance　and　the　practical　knowledge　of　republican　magistrates。　　　　　Charles　V；　his　rival　Francis　I；　and　Henry　VIII；　who　wished　to　hold　the　balance　between　them；　had　engaged　in　expenses　beyond　their　incomes；　the　ambition　nf　their　successors；　and　the　obstinacy　of　the　house　of　Austria；　which　continued　to　maintain　a　destructive　system　of　warfare　during　more　than　a　hundred　years；　caused　those　expenses；　in　spite　of　the　public　poverty；　to　go　on　increasing。　But　as　the　suffering　became　more　general；　the　friends　of　humanity　felt　more　deeply　the　obligation　laid　on　them　to　undertake　the　defence　of　the　poor。　By　an　order　of　sequence　opposite　to　the　natural　progress　of　ideas；　the　science　of　political　economy　sprung　from　that　of　finance。　Philosophers　wished　to　shield　the　people　from　the　speculations　of　absolute　power。　They　felt　that；　to　obtain　a　hearing　from　kings；　they　must　speak　to　them　of　royal　interests；　not　of　justice　or　duty。　They　investigated　the　nature　and　causes　of　national　wealth；　to　show　governments　how　it　might　be　shared　without　being　destroyed。　　　　　Too　little　liberty　existed　in　Europe　to　allow　those　who　first　occupied　themselves　with　political　economy　to　present　their　speculations　to　the　world；　and　finances　were　enveloped　in　too　profound　a　secrecy　to　admit　of　men；　not　engaged　in　public　business；　knowing　facts　enough　to　form　the　basis　of　general　rules。　Hence　the　study　of　political　economy　began　with　ministers；　when　once　it　had　fortunately　happened　that　kings　put　men　at　the　head　of　their　finances；　who　combined　talents　with　justice　and　love　of　the　public　weal。　Two　great　French　ministers；　Sully　under　Henry　IV；　and　Colbert　under　Louis　XIV；　were　the　first　who　threw　any　light　on　a　subject　till　then　regarded　as　a　secret　of　state；　in　which　mystery　had　engendered　and　concealed　the　greatest　absurdities。　Yet；　in　spite　of　all　their　genius　and　authority；　it　was　a　task　beyond　their　power　to　introduce　any　thing　like　order；　precision；　or　uniformity　into　this　branch　of　government。　Both　of　them；　however；　not　only　repressed　the　frightful　spoliations　of　the　revenue　farmers；　and　by　their　protection　communicated　some　degree　of　security　to　private　fortunes；　but　likewise　dimly　perceived　the　true　sources　of　national　prosperity；　and　busied　themselves　with　efforts　to　make　them　flow　more　abundantly。　Sully　gave　his　chief　protection　to　agriculture。　He　used　to　say　that　pasturage　and　husbandry　wee　the　two　beasts　of　the　state。　Colbert；　descended　from　a　family　engaged　in　the　cloth　trade；　studied　above　all　to　encourage　manufactures　and　commerce。　He　furnished　himself　with　the　opinion　of　merchants；　and　asked　their　advice　on　all　emergencies。　Both　statesmen　opened　roads　and　canals　to　facilitate　the　exchange　of　commodities：　both　protected　the　spirit　of　enterprise；　and　honoured　the　industrious　activity　which　diffused　plenty　over　their　country。　　　　　Colbert；　the　latter　of　the　two；　was　greatly　prior　to　any　of　the　writers　who　have　teated　political　economy　as　a　science；　and　reduced　it　to　a　body　of　doctrines。　He　had　a　system；　however；　in　regard　to　national　wealth：　he　required　one　to　give　uniformity　to　his　plans；　and　delineate　clearly　before　his　view　the　object　he　wished　to　attain。　His　system　was　probably　suggested　by　the　merchants　whom　he　consulted。　It　is　now　generally　known　by　the　epithet　mercantile；　sometimes　also　by　the　name　Colbertism。　Not　that　Colbert　was　its　author；　or　unfolded　it　in　any　publication；　but　because　he　was　beyond　comparison　the　most　illustrious　of　its　professors；　because；　notwithstanding　the　errors　of　his　theory；　the　applications　he　deduced　from　it　were　highly　advantageous；　and　because；　among　the　numerous　writers　who　have　maintained　the　same　opinion；　there　is　not　one　who　has　shown　enough　of　talent　even　to　fix　his　name　in　the　reader's　memory。　It　is　but　just；　however；　to　separate　the　mercantile　system　altogether　from　the　name　of　Colbert。　It　was　a　system　invented　by　trading　subjects；　not　by