MORELLET, Mélanges de littérature et de philosophie du 18e siècle (Paris, 1818), III, 4 sqq. World History

94.

The Development of Political Economy in the Eighteenth Century

Do we know everything? Are we as well off as we can be? These are the questions that should have been asked before issuing a decree of silence against all discussions relating to the administration. If we were quite sure that we had discovered the true principles of that very important science called political economy, we ought still to permit people to write, if for no other reason than to defend these principles against their obscuration by a taste for mere novelty, the natural restlessness of the human mind, and the passing whims of the government officials. Nevertheless, if all the principles of political economy were well established, the government might justify, in a tolerably plausible way, their law of silence by urging that since the State and the people are in a good condition, it is useless to look for better things, which mankind may perhaps never attain to.

But there are no States which are not as yet infinitely remote from this happy condition; and we may safely say that the chief obstacle which stands in the way of their reaching it is the very ignorance of the true principles of government, and the bad laws that this same ignorance has begotten. The proof that this ignorance exists is to be sought, I believe, in the obscurity which still envelops a great part of the terms of which the science of political economy is continually obliged to make use. So far as I can see, we attach in our language no definite and precise ideas to the words "commerce," "wealth," "traffic," "credit," "luxury," "liberty," "property," etc. A few persons, I am quite willing to concede, may have a right notion of the meaning of these abstract terms; it must, however, be admitted that their meaning is not familiar to all or generally accepted; and how can the principles of a science be well understood and established so long as its terms are neither clear nor fixed? . . .

If we look for the reasons for our ignorance, we shall readily discover two very important ones which well justify what we are saying of the necessity of writing on these vital questions. The first of these is the extreme difficulty of the problems raised by political economy; the second is the newness of this study not only in France but among all the most enlightened nations.

Difficulty of the subject of political economy

We venture to say at the very start that the search for the true principles of political economy is one of the most difficult and complicated objects of human pursuit. There is no economic question that does not present a vast number of aspects at the same moment, and no measure can be adopted in this field without its consequences affecting the whole body politic. A law relating to finance or commerce influences agriculture, navigation, population, industry, etc. This multitude of relations may well cause a law that appears expedient for such and such an object to be very prejudicial in other respects. Surrounded by these difficulties, how can the mind reach the truth unless it is assisted in its investigations, and aided in every possible way in clearing up its uncertainties, But where is such aid to be sought so abundantly as in printed books, in the education which these serve to disseminate, and in the men who form their opinions from reading them?

Political economy a new study

I have already called attention to the fact that this branch of knowledge has only been cultivated for a very short period. It is well known that before the last century commerce, in the widest sense of that word, was not regarded as in any way an affair of the State. The ancient authors scarcely advert to it at all. Xenophon, who touches upon the matter, doubts whether it has any advantage for the State, and Plato excludes it from his ideal republic. Even the Italians of past centuries have not discussed the subject, and as we descend the centuries and reach those nearest us it becomes clear how recent are the first works dealing with political economy.

Very few antedate John de Witt, who wrote in the middle of the last century. The first English economic works belong to the same period. In France, one of the first where one finds sound conclusions is the Détail de la France of Boisguillebert, published in 1695. From that time to the middle of our century there were only a few works in this field, and these remained unknown, if we except Melon’s Essay on Commerce in 1730. Finally, about 1750, the publication of Cantillon’s excellent Essay on Commerce in General, some translations from the English, such as Child’s book edited by the late M. de Gournay (as well as a few other works composed or published at the instigation of that worthy official), served as a signal for the development of the subject in France. Our knowledge in this field is thus so recent that it is quite impossible to conclude that enough has already been written.

Of course it will be pointed out that a great number of economic works have been published during the past ten years in which many important truths have been set forth. While I am far from grudging the writers of these works the tribute of esteem and gratitude which they deserve for applying themselves to the study of those truths which it is especially important for men to know, I still venture to ask whether in spite of all these useful books enough has already been said. . . .

The doctrine of economic liberty

I am aware that according to some writers of repute our century has taken a great step forward in raising commercial liberty to the rank of a principle and condemning accordingly all economic laws which interfere with the rights of property and freedom in industrial enterprises. It is maintained that this truth alone, When properly developed, with all its necessary consequences, would almost suffice by itself as a guide for the government. I, too, believe that this principle of economic liberty is a faithful guide which will never mislead, but it cannot, nevertheless, by itself, serve sufficiently to illuminate the path which the government should follow. It is a long way from a recognition of this one principle, true as it may be, to a complete system of political economy. . . .

Political economy and social reform

The determination of the best basis for the taxes and the best way to collect them, the discovery of the laws best adapted to lessen gradually and finally prevent those monstrous inequalities in wealth, that destructive vice of all States,—the solution of these and many other problems not less important do not depend upon this principle of commercial freedom, but upon an analytical knowledge of the whole organization of society and a complete theory of political economy. Now, so long as such a theory has not yet been formulated, the science will not have attained such a degree of perfection as it demands. The system upon which the social world is constructed must be discovered and set forth as Copernicus and Newton have discovered that of the physical universe. This problem must be solved ere the science of political economy can be said to have been completed, and we do not hesitate to repeat that it still remains unsolved.