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！
the French agriculturists would be converted into competitors with
the latter； agricultural production would be increased； and the
consumption lowered。 The necessary consequence would be diminution
in value of the products； decline in the value of property；
national poverty and national weakness in France。 The English
'present' in mere value would be dearly paid for in loss of power；
it would seem like the present which the Sultan is wont to make to
his pashas by sending them valuable silken cords。
Since the time when the Trojans were 'presented' by the Greeks
with a wooden horse； the acceptance of 'presents' from other
nations has become for the nation which receives them a very
questionable transaction。 The English have given the Continent
presents of immense value in the form of subsidies； but the
Continental nations have paid for them dearly by the loss of power。
These subsidies acted like a bounty on exportation in favour of the
English； and were detrimental to the German manufactories。 If
England bound herself to…day to supply the Germans gratuitously for
years with all they required in manufactured articles； we could not
recommend them to accept such an offer。 If the English are enabled
through new inventions to produce linen forty per cent。 cheaper
than the Germans can by using the old process； and if in the use of
their new process they merely obtain a start of a few years over
the Germans； in such a case； were it not for protective duties； one
of the most important and oldest branches of Germany's industry
will be ruined。 It will be as if a limb of the body of the German
nation had been lost。 And who would be consoled for the loss of an
arm by knowing that he had nevertheless bought his shirts forty per
cent cheaper？
If the English very often find occasion to offer presents to
foreign nations； very different are the forms in which this is
done； it is not unfrequently done against their will； always does
it behove foreign nations well to consider whether or not the
present should be accepted。 Through their position as the
manufacturing and commercial monopolists of the world； their
manufactories from time to time fall into the state which they call
'glut；' and which arises from what they call 'overtrading。' At such
periods everybody throws his stock of goods into the steamers。
After the elapse of eight days the goods are offered for sale in
Hamburg； Berlin； or Frankfort； and after three weeks in New York；
at fifty per cent under their real value。 The English manufacturers
suffer for the moment； but they are saved； and they compensate
themselves later on by better prices。 The German and American
manufacturers receive the blows which were deserved by the English
they are ruined。 The English nation merely sees the fire and
hears the report of the explosion； the fragments fall down in other
countries； and if their inhabitants complain of bloody heads； the
intermediate merchants and dealers say； 'The crisis has done it
all！' If we consider how often by such crises the whole
manufacturing power； the system of credit； nay the agriculture； and
generally the whole economical system of the nations who are placed
in free competition with England； are shaken to their foundations；
and that these nations have afterwards notwithstanding richly to
recompense the English manufacturers by higher prices； ought we not
then to become very sceptical as to the propriety； of the
commercial conditions of nations being regulated according to the
mere theory of values and according to cosmopolitical principles？
The prevailing economical school has never deemed it expedient to
elucidate the causes and effects of such commercial crises。
The great statesmen of all modern nations； almost without
exception； have comprehended the great influence of manufactures
and manufactories on the wealth； civilisation； and power of
nations； and the necessity of protecting them。 Edward III
comprehended this like Elizabeth； Frederick the Great like Joseph
II； Washington like Napoleon。 Without entering into the depths of
the industry theory； their foreseeing minds comprehended the nature
of in its entirety； and appreciated it correctly。 It was reserved
for the school of physiocrats to regard this nature from another
point of view in consequence of a sophistical line of reasoning。
Their castle in the air has disappeared； the more modern economical
school itself has destroyed it； but even the latter has also not
disentangled itself from the original errors； but has merely
advanced somewhat farther from them。 Since it did not recognise the
difference between productive power and mere values of exchange；
and did not investigate the former independently of the latter； but
subordinated it to the theory of values of exchange； it was
impossible for that school to arrive at the perception how greatly
the nature of the agricultural productive power differs from the
nature of the manufacturing productive power。 It does not discern
that through the development of a manufacturing industry in an
agricultural nation a mass of mental and bodily powers； of natural
powers and natural resources； and of instrumental powers too （which
latter the prevailing school terms 'capital'）； is brought to bear；
and brought into use； which had not previously been active； and
would never have come into activity but for the formation and
development of an internal manufacturing power； it imagines that by
the establishment of manufacturing industry these forces must be
taken away from agriculture； and transferred to manufacture；
whereas the latter to a great extent is a perfectly new and
additional power； which； very far indeed from increasing at the
expense of the agricultural interest； is often the means of helping
that interest to attain a higher degree of prosperity and
development。
NOTES：
1。 This is true respecting Spain up to the period of her invasion
by Napoleon； but not subsequently。 Our author's conclusions are；
however； scarcely invalidated by that exception。 TR。
2。 Say states in his Economie Politique Pratique； vol。 iii。 p。 242；
'Les lois ne peuvent pas cr閑r des richesses。' Certainly they
cannot do this； but they create productive power； which is more
important than riches； i。e。 than possession of values of exchange。
3。 Wealth of Nations； Book IV。 chap。 ii。
4。 From the great number of passages wherein J。 B。 Say explains
this view； we merely quote the newest from the sixth volume of
Economie Politique Pratique； p。 307： 'Le talent d'un avocat； d'un
m閐ecin； qui a 閠椤cquis au prix de quelque sacrifice et qui
produit un revenu； est une valeur capitale； non transmissible 唷a
v閞it椋弧ais qui r閟ide n閍nmoins dans un corps visible； celui de
la personne qui le poss鑔e。'
Chapter 13
The National Division of Commercial Operations and the
Confederation of the National Productive Forces
The school is indebted to its renowned founder for the
discovery of that natural law which it calls 'division of labour；'
but neither Adam Smith nor any of his successors have thoroughly
investigated its essential nature and character； or followed it out
to its most important consequences。
The expression 'division of labour' is an indefinite one； and
must necessarily produce a false or indefinite idea。
It is 'division of labour' if one savage on one and the same
day goes hunting or fishing； cuts down wood； repairs his wigwam；
and prepares arrows； nets； and clothes； but it is also 'division of
labour' if （as Adam Smith mentions as an example） ten different
persons share in the different occupations connected with the
manufacture of a pin： the former is an objective； and the latter a
subjective division of labour； the former hinders； the latter
furthers production。 The essential difference between both is； that
in the former instance one person divides his work so as to produce
various objects； while in the latter several persons share in the
production of a single object。
Both operations； on the other hand； may be called with equal
correctness a union of labour； the savage unites various tasks in
his person； while in the case of the pin manufacture various
persons are united in one work of production in common。
The essential character of the natural law from which the
popular school explains such