CCPNELJ. TTNIVERSITY Lli^BAHY. k I This book is not to be taken | U from t^e^'Epading Room, m g) ...WHEN DONE WITH, RETURN «TO.^ICE TO O i SHELF J/:^>^ "'"X| CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY FROM Cornell University Library The original of tliis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924031246725 SOPHISMS PROTECTION. BY THE LATE M. FREDERIC BAST I AT, Member of the Institute of France, Fart I. Sophisms of Protection li^irst Series. Fart II. Sopliisims of IProtection. Second. Series. Fart III. Spoliation and. Law. Fart IV, Capital and Interest, Translated from the Paris Edition of \i W ITH PREFACE BY HORACE WHITE CORN UNIVERSITY G. P. P U i M A M'y- SONS 1874. PKEFAOE. A PREVIOUS edition of this worli has been published under the title of "Essays on Political Economy, by the late M. Frederic Bastiat." When it became necessary to issue a second edition, the Free-Trade League offered to buy the stereotype plates and the copyright, with a view to the publi- cation of the book on a large scale and at a very low price. The primary object of the League is to educate public opi- nion ; to convince the people of the United States of the folly and wrongfulness of the Protective system. The methods adopted by the League for the purpose have been the holding of public meetings and the publication of books, pamphlets, and tracts, some of which are for sale at the cost of publica- tion, and others given away gratuitously. In publishing this book the League feels that it is offering the most effective and most popular work on political econo- my that has as yet been written. M. Bastiat not only en- livens a dull subject with his wit, but also reduces the propo- sitions of the Protectionists to absurdities. ii PREFACE, Free-Traders can do no better service in the cause of truth, justice, and humanity, than by circulating this little book among their friends. It is offered you at what it costs to print it. Will not every Free-Trader put a copy of the book into the hands of his Protectionist friends ? It would not be proper to close this short preface without an expression on the part of the League of its obligation to the able translator of the work from the French, Mr. Horace White, of Chicago. Office of The American Free-Tradk League, 38 Burling Slip, New-York, June, 1870. PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION. This compilation, from the works of the late M. Bastiat, is given to the public in the belief that the time has now come when the people, relieved from the absorbing anxi- eties of the war, and the subsequent strife on reconstruc- tion, are prepared to give a more earnest and thoughtful attention to econoinical questions than was possible during the previous ten years. That we have retrograded in economical science during this period, while making great strides in moral and political advancement bj the abolition of slavery and the enfranchisement of the freedmen, seems to me incontestable. Professor Perry has described very concisely the steps taken by the manufacturers in 1861, after the Southern members had lefi their seats in Con- gress, to reverse the policy of the government in reference to foreign trade.* He has noticed but has not laid so much stress as he might on the fact that while there was • Elements of FolUloal Eeonomjr, p. 4G1. iv PREFACK. no considerable public opinion to favor them, there was none at all to oppose them. Not only was the attention of the people diverted from the tariff by the dangers then impending, but the Republican party, which then came into power, had, in its National Convention, offered a bribe to the State of Pennsylvania for its vote in the Presidential election, which bribe was set forth in the fol- lowing words : "Resolved, That while providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties upon imports, sound policy requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial interests o Jthe whole conn- try; and we commend that policy of national exchanges which secures to the workirgmen liberal wages, to agriculture remu- nerative prices, to mechanics and manufactrrers an adequate \reward for their skill, labor and enterprise, and' to the nation commercial prosperity and independence." — Chicago Convention PlaJform, 1860. It is true that this resolution did not commit anybody to the doctrine that the industrial interests of the whole country are promoted by taxes levied upon imported property, however "adjusted," but it was understood, by the Pennsylvanians at least, to be a promise that if the Eepublican party were successful in the coming election, tlio doctrine of protection, which had been overthrown in 1846, and had been in an extremely languishing state ever since, should be put upon its legs again. I am far from asserting that this overture was needed to s« -sre the PREFACE. , V vote of Pennsylyania for Mr. Lincoln in 1860, or that that State was governed by less worthy motives in her political action than other States. I only remark that her delegates in the convention thought such a resolution would be extremely useful, and such was the anxiety to secure her vote in the election that a much stronger reso- lution might have been conceded if it had been required. I affirm, however, that there was no agitation on the tariff question in any other quarter. New Bngknd had imited in passing the tariff of 1857, which lowered the duties imposed by the act of 1 846 about fifty per cent., i. e., one- half of the previously existing scale. The Western States had not petitioned Congress or the convention to disturb the tariff; nor had New York done so, although Mr. Greeley, then as now, was invoking, more or less fre- quently, the shade of Henry Clay to help re-establish ' what is deftly styled the "American System." The protective policy was restored, after its fifteen years' sleep, under the auspices of Mr. Morrill, a Eepre- sentative (now a Senator) from Vermont. Latterly I have noticed in the speeches and votes of this gentleman (who is, I think, one of the most conscientious, as he is one of the most amiable, men in public life), a reluctance to follow to their logical conclusion the principles em- 'bodied in the "Morrill tariff" of 1861. His remarks upon the copper bill, during the recent session of Congress, . VI PREFACE. indicate that, in his opinion, those branches of American industry which are engaged in producing •■ articles sent abroad in exchange for the products of foreign nations, are entitled to some consideration. This is an important admission, but not so important as another, which he made in his speech on the national finances, January 24, 1867, in which, referring to the bank note circolation existing in the year 1860, he said : "And that uas a year of as large 'production and as much general prosperity as any, perhaps, in our history." * If the year imme- diately preceding the enactment of the Morrill tariff was a year of as large production and as much general pros- perity as any in our history, of what use has the Morrill tariff been ? "We have seen that it was not demanded by any public agitation. "We now see that it has been of no public utility. In combating, by arguments and illustrations adapted to the comprehension of the mass of mankind, the errors and sophisms with which protectionists deceive themselves and others, M. Bastiat is the most lucid and pointed of all writers on economical science with whose works I have any acquaintance. It is not necessary to accord to him a place among the architects of the science of political economy, although some of his admirers rank him among I* CongreBslonal Globe, Secofld Session Thirty-Ninth Congress, P»rt 1, r. 724. PKEFACE. VU the highest.* It is enough to count him among the great- est of its expounders and demonstrators. Hia death, which occurred at Pisa, Italy, on the 24th December, 1850, at the age of 49, was a serious loss to France and to the world. His works, though for the most part frag- mentary, and given to the public from time to time through the columns of the Journal des Economistes, the Journal des Debais, and the Libre Echange, remain a mon- ument of a noble intellect guided by a noble soul. They have been collected and published (including the Harmo- nies Economiques, which the author left in manuscript) by Guillaumin & Co., the proprietors of the Journal des Economistes, in two editions of six volumes each, 8vo. and 12mo. "When we reflect that these six volumes were produced between April, 1844, and December, 1850, by a young man of feeble constitution, who commenced life as a clerk in a mercantile establishment, and who spent much of his time during these six years in delivering public lectures, and laboring in the National Assembly, to which he was chosen in 1848, our admiration for such industry is only modified by the thought that if he had * Mr. Macleod {^Dictionary of Political Econom/y^ voL I, p. 246) speaks of Bastiat^s definition of Value as " the greatest rerolatlon that has been effected in any science since the days of Galileo." See also Professor Perry's pamphlet, Recent Phases of Th&wffht 4n Political Economy^ read before the American Social Science Association, October, . 1868, in which, it appears to me, that Bastiat's theory of Kent, tn annonncing vhich be was anticipated by Mr. Carey, is too highly praised. Vlii PREFACE. been more saving of his strength, he might have rendei-sd even greater services to his country and to mankind. The SopKismeis Economiques, which fill the larger portion of this volume, were not expected by their author to out- last the fallacies which they sought to overthrow. But these fallacies have lived longer and have spread over more of the earth's surface than any one a priori could have believed possible. It is sometimes useful, in oppos- ing doctrines which people have been taught to believe are peculiar to their own country and time, to show that the same doctrines have been maintained in other coun- tries and times, and have been exploded in other lan- guages. By what misuse of words the doctrine of Pro- tection came to be denominated the "American System," I could never understand. It prevailed in England nearly two hundred years before our separation from the mother country. Adam Smith directed the first formidable attack against it in the very year that our independence waa declared. It held its ground in England until it had starved and ruined almost every branch of industry — agr culture, manufactures, and commerce alike.* It was not * It 1b bo often affirmed by prnteotlonlBta that the Bapeiioiitj of Great Britain In manufactarca waa attained by means of protection, that t la worth while to dispel that lllnalon. The faots are precisely the reverae. Protection bad brought Great Britain In the year 1S4-2 to tho last atage» of penary and decay, and It wanted but a year or two more of the same regimen to have precipitated tho country Into a bloody reyolutloa. I quote a paragraph from Mlsallartlnoau 3 "History of England frtm 1S16 to IS54," Book VI, Chapter!). PREFACE. ix wholly overthrown until 1846, the s. me year that wit- nessed its discomfiture in the United States, as already shown. It still exists in a subdued and declining way in ".Serious as was the task of the Minister (Sir E. Peel) in every riew, the most immediate s^mpatliy was felt for him on account of the fearful state of the people. The distress had now so deepened in the manufacturing districts as to render it clearly inevitable that many must die, and h multitude be lowered to ft slate of sickness and irritability from want of food; while there seemed no chance of any member of the manufacturing classes coming out of the struggle at last with a vestige of property where- with to begin the world again. The pressure had long extended beyond the Interests first aifected, and when the new Ministry came into power, there seemed to be no class that was not threatened with ruin. In Carlisle, the Committee of Inquiry reported that a fourth of the population was in a. st'.te bordering on starvation — actually certain to die of famine, unless re- lieved by extraordinary exertions. In the woollen districts of Wiltshire, the allowance to the independent hiborer was not two-thirds of the mini- mum in the workhouse, and the larjjo existing population consumed only a foui-th of the bread and meat required by the much smaller population of 1821). In Stockport, more than half the master spinners had failed be- fore the close of 1S42; dwelling houses to the number of 8,000, were shut up; and the occupiers of many hundreds more were unable to pay rates at all. Five thousand persons were walliing thestreetsin compulsory idle- nes-*, and the Burnley guardians wrote to the Secretary of State that tho distress was far beyond their management; so that a government commis- sioner and government funds were sent down without delay. At a meet- ins; in Manchester, where humble shopkeepers were the speakers, anecdotes were related which told more than declamation, llent collectors were afraid to meet their principal8,asno money could be collected. Provision dealers were subject to incursions from a wolfish man prowling for food for his children, or from a half frantic woman, with her dying baby at her breast ; or from parties of ten or a dozen desperate wretches who wore levy- ing contributions along the street. The linen draper told how new clothes had become out of the question with his customers, and they bought only remnants and patches, to mend the old ones. The baker was more and mora surprised at the number of people who bought half-pennyworths of bread. A provision dealer used to throw away ou'side scraps ; but nowrespectablo customers of twenty years' standing bought them in pennyworths to moisten their potatoes. These shopkeepers contemplated nothing but ruin from the impoverished condition of their customers. While poor-rates were increasing beyond all precedent, their trade was only one-half, or one-third, or even one-tenth what it had been three years before. In thai; neighborhood, a gentleman, who had retired from business inlS38, leaving a prop-r'y worth £60,000 to his sons, and who had, early in the distress, becom^ 6ecui-lty for them, was showing tho works for the benefit of the creditors, at a salary of £1 a week. In families where the father hacj hitherto errned £2 per week, and laid by a portion weekly, and where all was now gone but the sacks of shavings they slept on, exertions were made to get 'blue milk*' for children to moisten their oatmeal ^^'ith ; but floon they could have it only on alternate days; and soon water must do. At Leeds the pauper stone-heapamounted to 150,000 tons ; and the guardiana offered the paupers 6s. per week for doing nothing, rather than Ts. 6d. per week for stone-breaking. The millwrights and other trades wero oflering apromium on o;iiigratlon, toindu9e their hands to go away. At m^cli^ey, X FKEfACE. France, despite the powerful and brilliant attacks of Saj , Bastiat, and Chevalier, but its end cannot be far distal t in that country. The Cobden Chevalier treaty with England has been attended by consequences so totally at variance with the theories and prophecies of the protec- tionists that it must soon succumb. As these pages are going through the press, a telegram -nnounces that the French Government has abolished the ^Tscriminating duties levied upon goods imported in foreign bottoms, and has asked our government to abolish the like discrimination which our laws have created. Commer- cial freedom is making rapid progress in Prussia, Austria, one-third «f the Inhabitants were pant>ers ; more than a fifth of the hoiuos stood empt-T ; and there was not work enonghln the place to employ properly ono-thlrd of the weavers. In Dorsetshire a man and his wife bad for wages 2s. 6d, per week, and three loaves : and the ablest laborer bad 6s. or 7s. la WiltsfaAre, tile poor peasants held open-afr meetings after worlw — which was neoessarily after dark. There, by the light of one or two Jlaring tallow candles, the man or the woman who had a story to tell stood on a chair, and related' how their children wer-^ fed and clothed in old times — poorly enough, hot so as to keep body and aoal together ; and now, bow they coala nohow maaago to do it. The bare details of the ages of their cbildren, and what the little things could do, and the prl«*.es of bacon and bread, and calico and coals, had more pathos in them than any oratory heard elsewhere." "But all this came from the Com Laws," Is the ready reply of tb« American protectionist. The Corn Laws were the doctrine of protection applied to breadstuffa, farm products, ** raw, materials." Bnt it was not only protection for corn that vexed England in 1843, but protection for ^very thing and every body, from the landlord and the mlU-owner to the kelp gatherer. Every species of manufacturing Industry bad asked and obtained protection. The nation had put in force, logically and thoroughly, the principle of denying themselves any share in the advantages which sature or art had conferred upon other climates and peoples, {which Is the principle of protection), and with the results so pathetically described by Miss Mnrllueau The prosperity of British manufnctnres dates from the year 1846. That they maintained iny kind of existence priix to that time is a most striliing proof of the vitality of human Induwry under "-t iMraeontlon of bad laws. PREFACJ5. XI Italy, aaJ even in Spain. The United States alone, among civilized nations, hold to the opposite principle. Our anomalous position in this respect is due, as I think, to our anomalous condition during the past eight or nine years, already adverted t» — a condition in which the pro- tected classes have been restrained by no public opinion — public opinion being too intensely preoccupied with the means of preserving the national existence to notice what was doing with the tariff. But evidences of a reawaken- ing are not wanting. There is scarcely an argument current among tho protectionists of the United States that was not current in France at the time Bastiat wrote the Sophismes Econo- miques. Nor was there one current in his time .that is not performing its bad office among us. Hence his demonstrations of their absurdity and falsity are equally applicable to our time and country as to his. They may have even greater force among us if they thoroughly dispel the notion that Protection is an "American system.'' Surely they cannot do less than this. There are one or two arguments current among the protectionists of the United States that were not rife in France when Bastiat wrote his Sophismes. It is said, for instance, that protection has failed to achieve all the good results expected from it, because the policy of the govern- ment has been variable. If we could have a steady XU PEE FACE. course of protection for a sufficient period of lime (nobody being bold enough to say what time would be suiEcient), and could be assured of having it, we should see won- derful progress. But, inasmuch as the policy of the government is uncertain, protection has never yet had a fair trial. This is like saying, "if the stone which I threw in the air had staid there, my head would not have been broken by its fall." It would not stay there. The law of gravitation ia committed against its staying there. Its only resting-place is on the earth. They begin by violating natural laws and natural rights — the right to exchange services for services — and then complain because these natural laws war against them and finally overcome them.. But it is not true that protection has not had a fair trial in the United States. Tlie protection has been greater at seme times than at others, that is alL Prior to the late war, all our revenue was raised from customs ; and while the tariffs of 1846 and 1857 were designated "free trade tariffs," to distinguish tliem from those exist- ing before nnd since, they were necessar v protective to a certain extent. Again, it is said that there is need of diversifying our industry — as though industry would not diversify itself BufBciently through the diverse tastes and predilections of individuals — as though it were necessary to supplement the work of the Creator in this behalf, by human enact- P E E F A C E . Xlil ments founded upon reciprocal rapine. The only ritiona) object of diversifying industry is to make people better and happier. Do men and women become better and happier by being huddled together in mills and factories, in a .stifling atmosphere, on scanty wages, ten hours each day and 313 days each year, than when cultivating our free and fertile lands ? Do they have equal opportunities for mental and moral improvement ? The trades-unions tell us, No. Whatever may be the experience of other countries where the land is either owned by absentee lords, who take all the product except what is necessary to give the tenant a bare subsistence, or where it is cut up in parcels not larger than an American garden patch, it is an undeniable fact that no other class of American workingmen are so independent, so intelligent, so well provided with comforts and leisure, or so rapidly advanc- ing in prosperity, as our agriculturists; and this notwith- standing they are enormously overtaxed to maintain other branches of industry, which, according to the protective theory, cannot support themselves. The natural tendency of our people to flock to the cities, where their eyes and ears are gratified at the expense of their other senses, physical and moral, is sufficiently marked not to need the influence of legislation to stimulate it. It is not the purpose of this pre ice" to anticipate the admirable arguments of M. Bastiat; but there is another theory in vogue which deserves a moment's consideration. XIV PREFACE. Mr. H. C. Carey tells us, that a country which exports its food, in reality exports its soil, the foreign consumers not giving back to the land the fertihzing elements abstracted from it. Mr. Mill has answered this argument, upon philosophical principles, at some length, showing that whenever it ceases to be advantageous to America to export "breadstuffs, she will cease to do so ; also, that when it becomes necessary to manure her lands, she will eitlier import manure or make it at home.* A shorter answer is, that the lands are no better manured by having the bread consumed in Lowell, or Pittsburgh, or even in Chicago, than in Birmingham or Lyons. But it seema to me that Mr. Carey does not take into account the fact that the total amount of breadstuffs exported from any country must be an exceedingly small fraction of the whole amount taken from the soil, and scarcely apprecia- ble as a source of manure, even if it were practically utilized in that way. Thus, our exportation of flour and meal, wheat and Indian corn, for the year 1860, as com- pared with the total crop produced, was as follows : TOTAL CROP.* Flonr and Moal, bbl«. Wleat, bn. Corn, ba 55,217,800 173,104,924 838,702,740 • Principles of Political Economy (People's Ed.), London, 1S65, pige 55T. t These fignres are taken from the census report for the y oar 1860, In this report the total production of flour and meal is given, not In barrels, but la valuo. The quantity Is ascertained by dividing tho total valuo by too average prlco per barrel in N«w York during the j««r, the aactoaUoo* PREFACE. XV ' Exportation. Flour and Mcftl.bbls. Wheat, bn. Corn I a. 2,845,305 4,155,153 l,314,'l55 Percentage of Exportation to Total Crop. 5.15 2.40 .39 This was the result for the .year preceding the enact- meiit of the Morrill tariff. It is true that our exports of wheat and Indian corn rose in the three years following the enactment of the Morrill tariff, from an average of eight million bushels to an average of forty -siz million bushels, but this is contrary to the theory that high tariffs tend to keep breadstuffs at home, and low ones to send them abroad. There is need of great caution in making generalizations as to the influence of tariffs on the move- ment of breadstuffs. Good or bad harvests in various countries exercise an uncontrollable influence upon their movement, far beyond the reach of any legislation short of prohibition. The market for breadstuffs in the world is as the number of consumers ; that is, of population. It is sometimes said in the way of reproach, (and it is a curious travesty of Mr. Carey's manure argument,) that foreign nations will not take our breadstuffs. It is not true ; but if it were, that would not be a good reason for our passing laws to prevent them from doing so ; that is, then being yery slight. Flour being a manufactured article, ia It not a little cariona that we exported under the "free trade tariif '^ twice aa large a per centage of breadstuffs in that form as we did of thi " raw material,^* wheat? Xvi PREFACE. to deprive them of the means to pay for them. Every country must pay for its imports vrlth its exports. It must pay for the services which it receives vyith the ser- vices which it renders. If foreign nations are not allowed to render services to us, how shall we render thsm the service of bread? The first series of Bastiat's Sophismes were published in 1845, and the second series in 1848. The first series were translated in 1848, by Mrs. D. J. McCord, and published the same year by G. P. Putnam, New York. Mrs. McCord's excellent translation has been followed (by per- mission of her publisher, who holds the copyright,) in this volume, having been first compared with the original, in the Paris edition of 1 863. A very few verbal alterations have been made, which, however, have no bearing on the accuracy and faithfulness of her work. The translation of the essay on " Capital and Interest " is from a duo- decimo volume published in London a year or two ago, the name of the translator being uqknown to me. The second series of the Sophismes, and the essay entitled "Spoliation and Law," are, I believe, presented in English for the first time in these pages. ^- w. CmcAQo, August 1, 1869. P AET I, SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. riEST SERIES. INTRODUCTION. My object in this little volume bas been to refute some of the ai'guments usually advanced against Free Trade. I am not seeking a combat with, the protectionists. I merely advance a principle which I am anxious to present clearly to the minds of sincere men, who hesitate because they doubt I am not of the number of those who maintain that protection is supported by interests. I believe that it is founded upon errors, or, if you will, upon incomplete truths. Too many fear free trade, for this apprehension to be other than sincere. My aspirations are perhaps high; but I confess that it would give me pleasure to hope that this little work might become, as it were, a manual for such men as may be called upon to decide between 2 2 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. the two principles. "When one has not made oneself perfectly familiar with the doctrines of free trade, the sophisms of protection perpetually return to thp mind under one form or another; and, on each occasion, in order to counteract their effect, it is necessary to enter into a long and laborious analysis. Few, and least of all legislators, h^ve leisure for this labor, which I would, on this account, wish to pre- sent clearly drawn up to their hand. But it may be said, are then the benefits of free trade so hidden as to be perceptible only to econo- mists by profession ? Yes ; we confess it ; our adversaries in the discus- sion have a signal advantage over us. They can, in a few words, present an incomplete truth ; which, for us to show that it is incomplete, renders, neces- sary long and uninteresting dissertations. This results from the fact that protection accumu- lates upon a single point tte good which it effects, while the evil inflicted is infused throughout the mass. The one strikes tho eye at a first glance, while the othev becomes perceptible only to close investigation. "With regard to free trade, preciselv the reverse is the case. It is thus with almost all questions of political economy. If you say, for instance: There is a machine which has turned out of employment thirty work- INTEODUCTION. S Or again : There is a spendthrift who encc arages every kind of industry ; Or: The conquest of Algiers has doubled the commerce of Marseilles ; Or, once more: The public taxes support one hundred thousand families ; You are understood at once ; your propositions are clear, simple, and true in themselves. If you deduce from them the piinciple that Machines are an evil ; That sumptuous extravagance, conquest, and heavy imposts are blessings ; Your theory will have the more success, because you will be able to base it upon indisputable facts. But we, for our part, cannot stop at a cause and its immediate effect ; for we know that this effect may in its turn become itself a cause. To judge of a measure, it is necessary that we should follow it from step to step, from result to result, until through the successive links of the chain of events we arrive at the final effect We must, in short, reason. But here we are assailed by clamorous exclama- tions: You are theorists, metaphysicians, ideolo- gists, Utopians, men of maxims ! and immediately all the prejudices of the public are against us. What then shall we do ? We must invoke the patience and candor of the reader, giving to our deductions, if we are capable of it, sufficient clear- 4 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTIOK Bess to throw forward at once, without disguise or palliation, the true and the false, in order, once for all, to determine whether the victory should be for Eestriction or Free Trade. I wish here to make a remark of some impor- tance. Some extracts from this volume have appeared in the " Journal des Economistes." In an article otherwise quite complimentary pub- lished by the Viscount de Eomanet (see Moniteur Industnel of the 15th and 18th of May, 1845), he intimates that I ask for the suppression of custom houses. Mr. de Eomanet is mistaken. I ask for the suppression of the protective policy. We do not dis- pute the right of government to impose taxes, but would, if possible, dissuade producers from taxing one another. It was said by Napoleon that duties should never be a fiscal instrument, but a means of protecting industry. "We plead the contrary, and say, that duties should never be made an instru- ment of reciprocal rapine ; but that they may be employed as a useful fiscal machina I am so far from asking for the suppression of duties, that I look upon them as .the anchor on which the future salvation of our finances will depend. I believe that they may bring immense receipts into the treasury, and, to give my entire and undisguised opinion, I am inclined, from the slow progress of healthy, economical doc- trines, and from the magnitude of our budget, to hbpe INTRODDCTION. 6 more for the cause of commercial reiorm froi.i the necessities of the Treasury than from the force of an enlightened public opinion. SOPHISMS OF PKOTECnON. 4.BUND ANCE — SCARCITY. Which is the best for man or for society, abun- dance or scarcity ? How, it may be exclaimed, can such a question be asked? Has it ever been pretended, is it possible to maintain, that scarcity can be the basis of a man's happiness ? Yes ; this has been maintained, this is daily main- tained ; and I do not hesitate to say that the scarcity theory is by far the most popular of the day. It fur- nishes the subject of discussions, in conversations, journals, books, courts of justice; and extraordinary as it may appear, it is certain that political economy will have fulfilled its task and its practical mission, when it shall have rendered common and irrefuta- ble the simple proposition that " in abundance con- sist man's riches." Do we not hear it said every day, " Jb'oreign na- tions are inundating us with their productions " ? Then we fear abundance. Has not Mr. de Saint Cricq said, " Production is superabundant " ? Then he fears abundance. Do we not see workmen destroying and breaking machinery? They are frightened by the excess of production ; in other words, they fear abundance. ABUNDANCE — SCARCITY. 7 Has not M-r. Bugeaud said, " Let bread be dear and the agriculturist will be rich " ? Now bread can only be dear because it is scarce. Then Mr. Bugeaud lauded scarcity. Has not Mr. d'Argout produced the fruitfulness of the sugar culture as an argument against it ? Has he not said, " The beet cannot have a perma- nent and extended cultivation, because a few acres given up to it in each department, would furnish sufficient for the consumption of all France " ? Then, in his opinion, good consists in sterility and scarcity, evil in fertility and abundance. " La Pressed' " Le Commerce" and the majority of our journals,- are, every day, publishing articles whose aim is to prove to the chambers and to gov- ernment that a wise policy should seek to raise prices by tariffs ; and do we not daily see these powers obeying these injunctions of the press? Now, tar- iffs can only raise prices by diminishing the quan- tity of goods offered for sale. Then, here we see newspapers, the legislature, the ministry, all guided by the scarcity theory, and I was correct in my state- ment that this theory is by far the most popular. How then has it happened, that in the eyes at once of laborers, editors and statesmen, abundance should appear alarming, and scarcity advantageous ? It is my intention to endeavor to show the origin of this delusion. A man becomes rich, in proportion to the profita- 8 SOPHISirS OF PROTECTION. bleness of his labor; that is to say, iru proporlwn as he sells his productions ai a high price. The price of his productions is high in proportion to their scarcity. It is plain then, that, as far as regards him at least, scarcity enriches him. Applying successively this mode of reasoning to each class of laborers individ- ually, the scarcity theory is deduced from it. To put thi* theory into practice, and in order to favor each class of labor, an. artificial scarcity is forced in every kind of production, by prohibition, restriction, suppression of machinery, and other analogous measures. In the same manner it is observed that when an article is abundant it brings a small price. The gains of the producer are, of course, less. If this is the case with all produce, all producers are then poor. Abundance then ruins society. And as any strong conviction will always seek to force itself into practice, we see, in many countries, the laws aiming to prevent abundance. Thi^ sophism, stated in a general fomi, would pro- duce but a slight impression. But when applied to any particular order of facts, to any particular article of industry, to any one class of labor, it is extremely specious, because it is a syllogism which is not false, but incomplete. And what is true in a syllogism always necessarily presents itself to the mind, while the incomplete, which is a negative quality, an unknown value, is easily forgotten in the calcuiatiois. ABUNDANCE — SOARClTr. 9 Man produces in order to consume. He is at once producer and consumer. The argument given above, considers him only under the first point of view. Let us look at him in the second character and the conclusion will be different. We may say, The consumer is rich in proportion as hebuys at a low price. He buys at a low price in proportion to the abundance of the article in demand; abundance then enriches him. This reasoning extended to all consumers must lead to the theory of abundance I It is the imperfectly understood notion of exchange , of produce which leads to these fallacies. If we consult our individual interest, we perceive immedi- ately that it is double. As sellers we are interested in high prices, consequently in scarcity. As buyers our advantage is in cheapness, or what is the same thing, abundance. It is impossible then to found a proper system of reasoning upon either the one or the other of these separate interests before determin- ing which of the two coincides and identifies itself with the general and permanent interests of man- kind. If man were a solitary animai, working exclu- sively for himself, consuming the fruit of his own personal labor; if, in a word, he did not exchange bis produce, the theory of scarcity could never have introduced itself into the world. It would be too strikingly evident, that abundance, whencesoever derived, is advantageous to him, whether this abun- 3 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. dance might be the result of his own labor, of inge- nious tools, or of powerful machinery; whether due to the fertility of the soil, to the liberality of nature, or to an inundation of foreign goods, such as the sea bringing from distant regions might cast upon his shores. Never would the solitary man have dreamed, in order to encourage bis own labor, of destroying his instruments for facilitating his work, of neutralizing the fertility of the soil, or of casting back into the sea the produce of its bounty. He would understand that his labor was a means not an end, and that it would be absurd to reject the object, in ,order to encourage the means. He would under- stand that if he has required two hours per day to supply his necessities, any thing which spares him an hour of this labor, leaving the result the same, gives him this hour to dispose of as he pleases in adding to his comforts. In a word, he would understand that every step in the saving of labor, is a step in the improvement of his condition. But traffic clouds our vision in the contemplation of this simple truth. In a state of society with the division of labor to which it leads, the production and consumption of an article no longer belong to the same individual. Each now looks upon his labor not as a means, but as an end. The exchange of produce creates with regard to each object two separate interests, that of the producer and that of the consumer ; and these two interests are always directly opposed to each other. ABUNDANCE — SCARCITY. 11 3 It is essential to analyze and study the nature of each. Let us then suppose a producer of whatever kind ; what is- his immediate interest ? It consists in two things : 1st, that the smallest possible num- ber of individuals should devote themselves to the business which he follows ; and 2dly, that the great- est possible number should seek the articles of his produce. In the more succinct terms of Political Economy, the supply should be small, the demand large ; or yet in other words : limited competition, unlimited consumption. "What on the other side is the immediate interest of the consumer ? That the supply should be large, the demand small. As these two interests are immediately opposed to each other, it follows that if one coincides with the general interest of society the other must be adverse to it. Which then, if either, should legislation favor as contributing most to the good of the community ? To determine this question, it suifices to inquire in which the secret desires of the majority of men would be accomplished. Inasmuch as we are producers, it must be con- fessed that we have each of us anti-social desires. Are we vine-growers? It would not distress its were the frost to nip all the vines in tha world except our own : this is the scarcity theory. Are we iron-workers ? We would desire (whatever t\i^ht 12 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECTION. be tbe public need) that the market should offer no iron but our own ; and precisely for the reason that this need, painfully felt and imperfectly supplied, causes us to receive a high price for our iron : again here is tJie Iheory of scarcity. Are we agriculturists ? We say with Mr. Bugeaud, let bread be dear, that is to say scarce, and our business goes well : again the theory of scarcity. Are we physicians ? We cannot but see that cer- tain physical ameliorations, such as the improved, climate of the country, the development of certain moral virtues, the progress of knowledge pushed to the extent of enabling each individual to take care of his own health, the discovery of certain simple remedies easily applied, would be so many fatal blows to our profession. As physicians, then, our secret desires are anti-social. I must not be under- stood to imply that physicians allow themselves to form such desires. I am happy to believe that they would hail with joy a univei-sal panacea. But in such a sentiment it is the man, the Christian, who manifests himself, and who by a praiseworthy abne- gation of self, takes that point of view of the ques- tion, which belongs to the consumer. As a physi- cian exercising his profession, and gaining from this profession his standing in society, his comforts, even the means of existence of his family, it is impossible but that his desires, or if you please so to word it, his interests, should be anti-social. ABUNDANCE — SCARCITY. 13 Are we manufacturers of cotton goods? We desire to sell them at the price most advantageous to ourselves. We would willingly consent to the suppression of all rival manufactories. And if we dare not publicly express this desire, or pursue the complete realization of it with some success, we do so, at least to a certain extent, by indirect means ; as for example, the exclusion of foreign goods, in order to diminish the quantity offered, and to produce thus by forcible means, and for our own profits, a scarcity of clothing. We might thus pass in review every business and every profession, and should always find that the producers, in their character of producers, have inva- riably anti-social interests. " The shop-keeper (says Montaigne) succeeds in his business through the extravagance of youth ; the laborer by the high price of grain ; the architect by the decay of houses ; ofii- cers of justice by lawsuits and quarrels. The stand- ing and occupation even of ministers of religion are drawn from our death and our vices. No physician takes pleasure in the health even of his friends ; no soldier in the peace of his country ; and so on with all." If then the secret desires of each producer were realized, the world would rapidly retrograde towards barbarism. The sail would proscribe steam; the oar would prosciibe the sail, onlyin its turn to give way to wagons, the wagon to the mule, and the mule 14 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. to the foot-peddler. "Wool would exclude cotton ; cotton would exclude wool ; and thus on, until the scarcity and want of every thing would cause man himself to disappear from the face of the globe. If we now go on to consider the immediate interest of the consumer, we shall find it in perfect harmony with the public interest, and with the well- being of humanity. When the buyer presents him- self in the market, he desires to find it abundantly furnished. He sees with pleasure propitious seasons for harvesting ; wonderful inventions putting within his reach the largest possible quantity of produce ; time and labor saved ; distances effaced ; the spirit of peace and justice diminishing the weight of taxes ; every barrier to improvement cast down ; and in all this his interest runs parallel with an enlightened public interest He may push his secret desires to an absurd and chimerical height, but never can they cease to be humanizing in their tendency. He may desire that food and clothing, house and hearth, instruction and morality, security and peace, strength and health, should come to us without limit and without labor or effort on our part, as the water of the stream, the air which we breathe, and the sunbeams in which we bask, but never could the realization of his most extravagant wishes run counter to the good of society}. It may be said, perhaps, that were these desires granted, the labor of the producer constantly ABUNDAKCE — SCAECITY. 15 checked would end by being entirely arrested for want of support. But -why? Because in this extreme supposition every imaginable need and desire would be completely satisfied. Man, like tbe All-powerful, would create by the single act of his will. How in such an hypothesis could laborious production be regretted ? Imagine a legislative assembly composed of pro- ducers, of whom each member should cause to pass into a law his secret desire as a, producer ; the code which would emanate from such an assembly could be nothing but systematized monopoly ; the scarcity theory put into practice. In the same manner, an assembly in which each member should consult only his immediate interest of consumer would aim at the systematizing of free trade ; the suppression of every restrictive measure ; the destruction of artificial barriers ; in a word, would realize the theory of abundance.. It follows then, That to consult exclusively the immediate interest of the producer,- is to consult an autl-social interest To take exclusively for basis the interest of the consumer, is to take for basis the general interest. Let me be permitted to insist once more upon this point of view,- though at the risk of repetition. A radical antagonism exists between the seller and the buyer. 16 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. The former wishes the article offered to be scarce, supply small, and at a high price. The latter wishes it abundant, supply large, and at a low price. The laws, which should at least remain, neutral, take part for the seller against the buyer; for the producer against the consumer ; for high against low prices ; for scarcity against abundance. They act, if not intentionally at least logically, upon the principle that a nation is rich in proportion as it is in want of every thing. J For, say they, it is necessary to favor the producer ■ by securing him a profitable disposal of his goods. To effect this, their price must be raised ; to raise the price the supply must be diminished ; and to dimin- ish the supply is to create scarcity. Let us suppose that at this moment, with these laws in full action, a complete inventory should be made, not by value, bat by weight, measure and quantity, of all articles now in Prance calculated to supply the necessities and pleasures of its inhabit- ants ; as grain, meat, woollen and cotton goods, fuel, etc. Let us suppose again that to-morrow every baiTier to the introduction of foreign goods should be removed. Then, to judge of the effect of such a reform, let a new inventory be made three months hence. Is it not certain that at the time of the secood ABUJSfDANCE — SCARCITY. 17 inventory, the quantity of grain, cattle, goods, iron, coal, sugar, etc., will be greater than at the first? So true is this, that the sole object of our protective tariffs is to prevent- such articles from reaching us, to diminish the supply, to prevent low prices, or which is the same thing, the abundance of goods. Now I ask, are the people under the action of these laws better fed because there is less bread, less meat, and less sugar in the country 1 Are they better dressed because there are fewer goods ? Bet ter warmed because there is less coal ? Or do they prosper better in their labor because iron, copper, tools' and machinery are scarce ? But, it is answered, if we are inundated, with foreign goods and produce, our coin will leave the country. Well, and what matters that ? Man is not fed with coin. He does not dress in gold, nor warm himself with silver. What difference does it make whether there be more or less coin in the country, provided there 'be more bread in the cupboard, more meat in the larder, more clothing in the press, -and more wood in the cellar ? To Restrictive Laws, I offer this dilemma : Either you allow that you produce scarcity, or you do not allow it. If you allow it, you confess at once that your end is to injurc the people as much as possible. If you 18 SOPHISMS OF PBOTEenON. do not allow it, then you deny your power to dimm- ish the supply, to raise the price, and consequently you deny having favored the producer. You are either injurious or inefficient. You can never be useful II. OBSTACLE — CAUSE. The obstacle mistaken for the cause — scarcity mistaken for abundance. The sophism is the same. It is well to study it under every aspect Man naturally is in a state of entire destitution. Between this state and the satisfying of his wants, there exists a multitude of obstacles which it is the object of labor to surmount It is interesting to seek how and why he could have been led to look even upon these obstacles to his happiness as the cause of it I wish to take a journey of some hundred milea But, between the point of my departure and my des- tination, there are interposed, mountains, rivers, swamps, forests, robbers — in a word, obstacles ; and to conquer these obstacles, it is necessary that I should bestow much labor and great efforts in oppos- ing them ; — or, what is the same thing, if others do OBSTACLE — CAUSE. 19 it for me, I must pay tliem the value of then exer- tions. It is evident that I should have heen better off had these obstacles never existed. Through the journey of life, in the long series of days from the cradle to the tomb, man has many difficulties to oppose him in his progress. Hunger, thirst, sickness, heat, cold, are so many obstacles scattered along his road. In a state of isolation, he ■would be obliged to combat them all by hunting, fishing, agriculture, spinning, weavingijirchitecture, etc., and it is very evident that it would be better for him that these difficulties should exist to a less degree, or even not at all. In a state of society he is not obliged, personally, to struggle with each of these obstacles, but others do it for him ; and he, in return, must remove some one of them for the benefit of his fellow -men. Again it is evident, that, considering mankind as a whole, it would be better for society that these obstacles should be as weak and as few as possible. But if we examine closely and in detail the phe- nomena of society, and the private interests of men as modified by exchange of produce, we perceive, without difficulty, how it has happened that wants have been confounded with riches, and the obstacle with the cause. The separation of occupations, which results from the habits of exchange, causes each man, instead of struggling against all surrounding obstacles to com- 20 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. bat only one; the effort being made not for himself alone, but for the benefit of his fellows, who, in their turn, render a similar service to him. Now, it hence results, that this man looks upon the obstacle which he has made it his profession to combat for the benefit of others, as the immediate cause of his riches. The greater, the more serious, the more stringent may be rhis obstacle, the more he is remunerated for the conquering of it, by those who are relieved by his labors. A physician, for instance, does not busy himself in baking his bread, or in manufacturing his cloth- ing and his instruments ; others do it for him, and he, in return, combats the maladies with which his patients are afQicted. The more dangerous and fre- quent these maladies are, the more others are willing, the more, even, are they forced, to work in his ser- vice. Disease, then, which is an obstacle to the hap- piness of mankind, becomes to him the source of his comforts. The reasoning of all producers is, in ■what concerns themselves, the sam& As the doctor draws his profits from disease, so does the ship owner from the obstacle called distance; the agricul- turist from that named hunger ; the cloth manufac- turer from cold; the schoolmaster lives upon igtio- ranee, the jeweler upon vanity, the lawyer upon quarrels, the notary upon breach of faith Each profession has then an immediate interest in the OBSTACLE— CAUSE. 21 continuation, even in the extension, of the particular obstacle to which its attention has been directed. Theorists hence "go on to found a system upon these individual interests, and say: Wants are riches : Labor is riches : The obstacle to well-being is well-being : To multiply obstacles is to give food to industry. Then comes the statesman ; — and as the develop- ing and propagating of obstacles is the developing and propagating of riches, what more natural than that he should bend his efforts to that point ? He says, for instance : If we prevent a large importation of iron, we create a difficulty in procuring it. This obstacle severely felt, obliges individuals to pay, in order to relieve themselves from it. A certain num- ber of our citizens, giving themselves up to the combating of this obstacle, will thereby make their fortunes. In proportion, too, as the obstacle is great, and the mineral scarce, inaccessible, and of difficult and distant transportation, in the same proportion will be the number of laborers maintained by the various branches of this industry. The same reasoning will lead to the suppression of machinery. Here are men who are at a loss how to dispose of their wine-harvest. This-is an obstacle wliich other men set about removing for them by the manufac- ture of casks. It is fortunate, say our statesmen, that this obstacle exists, since it occupies a portion 22 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECTION. of the labor of the Bation, and enriches a certain number of our citizens But here is presented to us an ingenious machine, which cuts down the oak, squares it, makes it into staves, and, gathering these together, forms them into casks. The obstacle is thus diminished, and with it the profits of the coop- ers. We must prevent this. Let us proscribe the machine I To sifl thoroughly this sophism, it is sufficient to remember that human labor is not an end, but a means. It is never vdthout employment If one obstacle is removed, it seizes another, and mankind is delivered from two obstacles by the same eifort which was at first necessary for ona If the labor of coopers becomes useless, it must take another direction. But with what, it may be asked, will they be remunerated ? Precisely with what they are at present remunerated. For if a certain quantity of labor becomes free from its original occupation, to be otherwise disposed of, a corresponding quantity of wages must thus also become free. To maintain that human labor can end by wanting employment, it would be necessary to prove that mankind will cease to encounter obstacles. In such a case, labor would be not only impossible, it would be super- fluous. We should have nothing to do, because we should be all-powerful, and our fiat alone would satisfy at once our wants and our desirea EFFOHT —RESULT. 23 III. EFFORT — RESULT. "We have seen that betweeu our wants and their gratification many obstacles are interposed. We conquer or weaken these by the employment of our faculties. It may be said, in general terms, that industry is an effort followed by a result. But by what do we measure our well-being? By the result of our effort, or by the ejfort itself f There exists always a proportion between the effort employed and the result obtained. Does progress consist in the relative increase of the second or of the first term of this proportion ? Both propositions have been sustained, and in political economy opinions are divided between them. According to the first system, riches are the result of labor. They increase in the same ratio as the result does to the effort. Absolute perfection, of which God is the type, consists in the infinite distance between these two terms in this relation, viz., effort none, result infinite. The second system maintains that it is the effort itself which forms the measure of, and constitutes, our riches. Progression is the increase of the pro- 2)ortion of ifie effort to the result. Its ideal extreme 24 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. rnay be represented by the eternal and fruitless efforts of Sisyphus.* The first system tends naturally to the encourage- ment of every thing -which diminishes difficulties, and augments production, — as powerful machinery, whish adds to the strength of man; the exchange of produce, which allows us to profit by the various natural agents distributed in different degrees over the surface of our globe; the intellect which dis- covers, experience which proves, and emulation whicli excites. The second as logically inclines to every thing which can augment the difficulty and diminish the product ; as privileges, monopolies, restrictions, pro- hibitions, suppression of machinery, sterility, eta It is well to remark here that the univereal prac- tice of men is always guided by the principle of the first system. Every workman, whether agricul- turist, manufacturer, merchant, soldier, writer or philosopher, devotes the strength of his intellect to do better, to do more quickly, more economically, — in a word, to do more with less. The opposite doctrine is in use with legisktore, editors, statesmen, men whose business is to make experiments upon society. And even of these we may observe, that in what pei-sonally concerns them- selves, they act, like every body else, upon the » Wo will therefore beg the render to allow d3 In fnturo, for the sake of eonclsonoss, to designate this ty stem under tho term of SUypkinm. EFFORT — RESULT. 25 principle of obtaining from their labor the greatest possible quantity of useful results. It may be supposed that I exaggerate, and that there are no true SisyiyJnsts. I grant that in practice the principle is not pushed to its extremest consequences. And this must always be the case when one starts upon a-wrong principle, because the absurd and injurious results to which it leads, cannot but check it in its progress. For this reason, practical industry never can admit of Sisyphism. The error is too quickly followed by its punisTiment to remain concealed. ' But in the speculative industry of theorists and statesmen, a false principle may be for. a long time followed up, before the complication of its consequences, only half understood, can prove its falsity; and even when all is revealed, the opposite principle is acted upon, self is cofltradicted, and justification sought, in the incomparably absurd modern axiom, that in political economy there is no principle universally true. Let us see then, if the two opposite principles I ' have laid down do not predominate, each in its turn ; — the one in practical industry, the other in indus- trial legislation. I have already quoted some words of Mr. Bu- geaud ; but we must look on Mr. Bugeaud in two separate characters, the agricultTirist and the legis- lator. i 26 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. As agriculturist, Mr. Bugeaud makes every effort to attain the double object of sparing labor, and obtaining bread cheap. When he prefers a good plough to a bad one, when he improves the quality of his manures ; when, to loosen his soil, he substi- tutes as much as possible the action of the atmos- phere for that of the hoe or the harrow ; when he calls to his aid every improvement that science and experience have revealed, he has, and can have, but one object, viz., to diminish the proportion of the effort to the result. "We have indeed no other means of judging of the success of an agriculturist, or of the merits of his system, but by observing how &r he has succeeded in lessening the one, while he increases the other ; and as 'all the farmers in the world act upon this principle, we may say that all mankind are seeking, no doubt for their own advan- { tage, to obtain at the lowest price, iread, or what- ever other article of produce they may need, always diminishing the effort necessary for obtaining any given quantity thereof This incontestable tendency of human nature, once proved, would, one might suppose, be sufficient to point out the true principle to the legislator, and to show him how he ought to assist industry (if indeed it is any part of his business to assist'it at all), for it would be absurd to say that the laws of men should operate in an inverse ratio from those of Providence. EFFORT — RESULT. 21 Yet we have heard Mr. Bugeaud in his character of legislator, .exclaim, " I do not understand this theory of cheapness ; I would rather see bread dear, and work more abundant." And consequently the deputy from Dordogne votes in favor of legislative measures whose effect is to shackle and impede com- merce, precisely because by so doing we are pre- vented from procuring by exchange, and at low price, what direct production can only furnish more expensively. Now it is very evident that the system of Mr. Bugeaud the deputy, is directly opposed to that of Mr. Bugeaud the agriculturist. Were he consistent with himself, he would as legislator vote against all restriction ; or else as farmer, he would practice in his fields the same principle which he proclaims in the public councils. "We should then see him sowing his grain in his most sterile fields, because he would thus succeed in laboring much, to obtain little. We should see him forbidding the use of the plough, becaase he could, by scratching up the soil with his nails, fully gratify his double wish of "dear bread and abundant labor." Eestriction has for its avowed object, and acknowl- edged effect, the augmentation of labor. And again, equally avowed and acknowledged, its object and effect are, the increase of prices ; — a synonymous term for scarcity of produce. Pushed then to its 28 SOPHISMS OP PEOTECTION. greatest extreme, it is pure Sisyphism as we have defined it : labor infinite ; result nothing. Baron Charles Dupin, who is looked upon as the oi-acle of the peerage in the science of political economy, accuses railroads of injuring shipping , and it is certainly true that the most perfect means of attaining an object must always limit the use of a less perfect means. But railways can only injure shipping by drawing from it articles of transporta- tion ; this they can only do by transporting more cheaply ; and they can only transport more cheaply, by diminishing the proportion of the effort employed to Hie result obtained; for it is in this that cheapness consists. When, therefore, Baron Dapin laments the suppression of labor in attaining a given result, he maintains the doctrine oi Sisyphism. Logically, if he prefers the vessel to the railway, he should also prefer the wagon to the vessel, the pack-saddle to the wagon, and the wallet to the pack-saddle ; for this is, of all known means of ti-ansportation, the one which requires the greatest amount of labor, in proportion to the result obtained. " Labop constitutes the riches of the people," said Mr. de Saint Cricq, a minister who has laid not a few shackles upon our commerce. This was no ellip- tical expression, meaning that the " results of labor constitute the riches of the people." No, — this statesman intended to say, that it is the intensity of labor, which measures riches; and the proof of EFFOR'l— RESULT. 29 this is, that from step to step, from roatrictioa to restriction, he forced on France (and in so doing believed that he was doing well) to give to the pro- curing, of, for instance, a certain quantity of iron, double the necessary labor. In England, iron was then at eight francs ; in France it cost sixteen. Sup- posing the day's work to be worth one franc, it is evident that France could, by barter, procure a quintal of iron by eight days ' labor taken from the labor of the nation. Thanks to the restrictive measures of Mr. de Saint Cricq, sixteen days' work were necessary to procure it, by direct production. Here then we have double labor for an identical result; therefore double riches ; and riches, measured not by the result, but by the intensity of labor. Is not this pure and unadulterated Sisyphism? That there may be nothing equivocal, the minister carries his idea still farther, and on tiie same prin- ciple that we have heard him call the intensity of labor riches, we will find him calling the abundant results of labor, and the plenty of every thing proper to the satisfying of our wants, poverty. "Every where," he remarks, ''machinery has pushed aside manual labor ; every where production is supera- bundant ; every where the equilibrium is destroyed between the power of production and that of con- sumption." Here then we see that, according to Mr. de Saint Cricq, if France was in a critical situation, it was because her productions were too abundant ; 30 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. there was too much intelligence, too much efficiency in her national labor. We were too well fed, too well clothed, too well supplied with every thing ; the rapid production was more than sufficient for our wants. It was necessary to put an end to this calamity, and therefore it became needful to force us, by restrictions, to work more, in order to pro- duce less. I also touched upon an opinion expressed by another minister of commerce, Mr. d'Argout, which is worthy of being a little more closely looked into. Wishing to give a death blow to the beet, he said : " The culture of the beet is undoubtedly useful, but this tLsefulness is limited. It is not capable of the pro- digious developments which have been predicted of it To be convinced of this it is enough to remark that the cultivation of it must necessarily be con- lined within the limits of consumption. Double, treble if you will, the present consumption of France, and you will still find that a very small portion of her soil will -suffice for this consumption. (Truly a most singular cause of complaint ! ) Do you wish the proof of this ? How tnany hectares were planted in beets in the year 1828 ? 3,130, which is l-10540th of our cultivable soil. How many are there at this time, when our domestic sugar supplies one-third of the consumption of the country ? 16,700 hectai-es, or l-1978th of the cultivable soil, or 45 centiare8 for each commune. Suppose that our domestic EFFORT — RESULT. 31 Bugar should monopolize the supply of the whole consumption, we still would have but 48,000 hec* tares or l-689th of our cultivable soil in beets."* There are two things to consider in this quotation. The facts and the doctrina The facts go to prove that very little soil, capital, and labor would be necessary for the production of a large quantity of sugar ; and that each commune of France would be abundantly provided with it by giving up one hec- tare to its cultivation. The peculiarity of the •doctrine consists in the looking upon this facility of production as an unfortunate circumstance, and the regarding the very fruitfulness of this new branch of industry as a limitation to its usefulness. It is not my purpose here to constitute myself the defender of the beet, or the judge of the singular facts stated by Mr. d'Argout, but it is worth the trouble of examining into the doctrines of a states- man, to whose judgment France, for a long time, "confided the fate of her agriculture and her com- merce. I began by saying that a variable proportion exists in all industrial pursuits, between the effort and the result. Absolute imperfection consists in an infinite effort, without any result ; absolute per- * In justice to Mr. d'Argout wo should say that this singular language Is given by him as the argument of the enemies of the beet. But he made It his own, and sanctioned it by the law in justifloation of which he adduced «f- .: ; - - 32 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. fection in aa unlimited result, without any effort; and perfectibility, in the progressive diminution of the effort, compared with the result. But Mr. d'Argout tells us, that where we looked for life, we shall find only death. The importance of any object of industry is, according to him, in direct proportion to its feebleness. What, for instance, can we expect from the beet ? Do you not see that 48,000 hectares of land, with capital and labor in proportion, will suffice to furnish sugar to all France ? It is then an object of limited tise- fulness ; limited, be it understood, in the ivork which it calls for'; and this is the sole measure, according to our minister, of the. usefulness of any pureuit. This usefulness would be much more limited still, if, thanks to the fertility of the soil, or the richness of the beet, 24,000 hectares would serve instead of 48,000. If there were only needed twenty times, a hundred times more soil, more capital, more labor, to attain the same result — Oh 1 then some hopes might be founded upon this article of industry ; it would be worthy of the protection of the state, for it would open a vast field to national labor. But to produce much with little is a bad example, and the laws ought to set things to rights. What is true with regard to sugar, cannot be false with regard to bread. If therefore the useful- ness of an object of industry is to be calculated, not by the comforts which it can furnish with a certain EFFOET — RESULT. 33 quantum of labor, but, on the contrary, by the increase of labor which it requires in order to furnish a certain quantity of comforts, it is evident that we ought to desire, that each acre of land should pro- duce little corn, and that each grain of corn should furnish little nutriment; in other words, that our territory should be sterile enough to require a con- sidei'ably larger proportion of soil, capital, and labor to nourish its population. The demand for human labor could not fail to be in direct pi-oportion to this sterility, and then truly would the wishes of Messrs. Bugeaud, Saint Cricq, Dupin, and d'Argout be satisfied ; bread would be dear, work abundant, and France would be rich — rich according to the understanding of these gentlemen. All that we could have further to hope for, would be, that human intellect might sink and become extinct ; for, while intellect exists, it can but seek continually to increase the proportion of the end to the rneans ; of Uie product ia the labor. Indeed it is in ,this continuous effort, and in this alone, that jntelleot -consists. i.V) Sisyphism has then been the, doctrine of all those who have been intrusted with the regulation of the industry. of our, country. It would not be just to reproach them with this; for this principle becomes that of our ministry, orily because it prevails in the chambers ; -it prevails in the chambers, only because it is sent there by the ielectora,l body ; and the elec- 34 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. toral body is imbued with it, only because public opinion is filled with it to repletion. Let me repeat here, that I do not accuse such men as Messrs. Bugeaud, Dupin, Saint Cricq, and d'Ar- gout, of being absolutely and always Sisyphisls. Very certainly they are not such in their personal transactions ; very certainly each one of them will procure for himself by barter, what by direct produc- tion would be attainable only at a higher price. But I maintain that they are Sisyphists when they prevent the country from acting upon the same principle. IV. EQUALIZING OF THE FACILITIES OF PKODTJCTION'. It is said but, for fear of being accused of manufacturing Sophisms for the mouths of the protectionists, I will allow one of their most able reasoners to speak for himself. " It is our belief that protection should correspond to, should be the representation of, the difference which exists between the price of an article of home production and a similar article of foreign production A protecting duty calcu!\ated upon such a basis does nothing more than secure EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PKODUCTION. 35 free competition ; free competition can only exist where there is an equality in the facilities of production. In a horse-race the load which each horse carries is weighed and all advantages equal- ized ; otherwise there could be no competition. In commerce, if one producer can undersell all others, he ceases to be a competitor and becomes a monop- olist Suppress the protection which repre- sents the difference of price according to each, and foreign productions must immediately inundate and obtain the monopoly of our market."* " Every one ought to wish, for his own sake an(^ for that of the community, that the productions of the country should be protected agaiijst foreign- com- petition, whenever the latter may he able to Undersell the former." -^ This argument is constantly recurring in all writ- ings of the protectionist school. It is my intention to make a careful investigation of its merits, and I must begin by soliciting the attention and the patience of the readei*. I will first examine into the inequalities which depend upon natural causes, and afterwards into those which are caused by diversity of taxes. Here, as elsewhere, we find the theorists who favor protection, taking part with the producer. Let us consider the case of the unfortunate- consumer, who * M. le Vicomte de Bomanet^ t Matbieu de Oombasla. ^ 36 SOPHISMS OF PSOTECTION. seems to have entirely escaped their attention. They compare the field of production to the turf. But on the turf, the race is at once a means and an end. The public has no interest in the struggle, independent of the struggle itself. When your horses are started in the course with the single object of determining which is the best runner, nothing is more natural than that their burdens should be equalized. But if your object were to send an important and critical piece of intelligence, could you without incongruity place obstacles to the speed of that one whose fleetness would secure the best means of attaining your end? And yet this is your course in relation to industry. You forget the end aimed at, which is the loell-being of the community. But we cannot lead our opponents to look at things from our point of view, let us now take theirs ; let tis examine the question as producers. I will seek to prove 1. That equalizing the facilities of production is to attack the foundations of all trade. 2. That it is not true that the labor of one coun- try can b6 crushed by the competition of more favored climates. 3. That, even were this the case, protective duties cannot equalize the facilities of production. 4. That freedom of trade equalizes these condi- tions as much as possible ; and 5. That the countries which are the least favored EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PEODUCTION. 37 by nat\ire are those which profit most by freedom of trade. I. The equalizing of the facilities of production, is not only the shackling of certain articles of com- merce, but it is the attacking of the system of mutual exchange in its very foundation principle. For this system is based precisely upon the very diversities, or, if the expression be preferred, upon the inequalities of fertility, climate, temperature, capabilities, which the protectionists seek to render nulL If Guyenne sends its wines to Brittany, and Brittany sends corn to Gruyenne, it is because these two provinces are, from different circumstances, induced to turn their attention to the production of different articles. Is there any other rijle for inter- national exchanges? Again, to bring against such exchanges the very inequalities of condition which excite and explain them, is to attack them in their very cause of being. The protective system, closely followed' up, would bring men to live like snails, in a state of complete isolation. In short, there is not one of its Sophisms, which if carried through by vigorous deductions, would not end in destruction and annihilation. IL It is not true that the unequal facility of pro- duction, in two similar branches of industry, should necessarily cause the destruction of the one which is the least fortunate. On the turf, if one horse gains tbe prize, the other loses it ; but when two 38 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTIOlir. horses work to produce any useful article, each pio- duces in proportion to his strength ; and because the stronger is the more useful, it does not follow- that the weaker is good for nothing. Wheat is cul- tivated in every department of France, although there are great differences in the degree of fertility existing among them. If it happens that there be one which does not cultivate it, it is because, even to itself, such cultivation is not useful. Analogy will show us, that under the influence of an unshackled trade, notwithstanding similar diiFer- ences, wheat would be produced in every kingdom of Europe ; and if any one were induced to abandon entirely the cultivation of it, this would only be, because it would he lier interest to employ otherwise her lands, her capital, and her labor. And why does not the fertility of one department paralyze the agriculture of a neighboring and less favored one ? Because the phenomena of political economy have a suppleness, an elasticity, and, so to speak, a self-leveling power, which seems to escape the atten- tion of the school of protectionists. They accuse us of being theorists, but it is themselves who are theorists to a supreme degree, if being theoretic con- sists in building up systems upon the experience of a single fact, instead of profiting by the experience of a series of facts. In the above example, it is the difference in the value of lands, which compensates for the difference in their fertility. Your field pro EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PRODUCTION. 39 duces three times as much as mine. Yes. But it has cost you three times as much, and therefore I can still compete with you : this is the sole mystery. And observe how the advantage on one point leads to disadvantage on the other. Precisely because your soil is more fruitful, it is more dear. It is not accidentally but necessarily that the equilibrium is established, or at least inclines to establish itself; and can it be denied that perfect freedom in exchanges is, of all the systems, the one which favors this tendency? I have cited an agricultural example ; I might as easily liave taken one from any trade. There are tailors at Quimper, but that does not prevent tailors from being in Paris also, although the latter have to pay a much higher rent, as well as higher price for furniture, workmen, and food. But their customers are sufficiently numerous not only to re-establish the balance, but also to make it lean on their side. When therefore the question is about equalizing the advantages of labor, it would be well to consider whether the natural freedom of exchange is not the best umpire. This self-leveling faculty of political phenomena is so important, and at the same time so well calcu- lated to cause us to admire the providential wisdom which presides over the equalizing government of 40 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. society, that I must ask permission a little longer, to turn to it the attention of the reader. The protectionists say, Such a nation has the advantage over us, in being able to procure cheaply, coal, iron, machinery, capital ; it is impossible for us to compete with it We must examine the proposition under other aspects. For the present, I stop at the question, whether, when an advantage and a disadvantage are placed in juxtaposition, they do not bear in them- selves, the former a descending, the latter an ascend- ing power, which must end by placing them in a just equilibrium. Let us suppose the countries A and B. A has every advantage over B ; you thence conclude that labor will be concentrated upon A, while B must be abandoned. A, you say, sells much more than it buys ; B buys more than it sells. I might dispute this, but I will meet you upon your own ground. In the hypothesis, labor, being in great demand in A, soon rises in value ; while labor, iron, coal, lands, food, capital, all being little sought after in B, soon fall in price. Again: A being always selling and B always buying, cash passes from B to A It is abundant in A— very scarce in B. But where there is abundance of cash, it follows that in all purchases a large proportion of it will be needed. Then in A, real ckarne^, which proceeds EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PRODUCTION. 41 from a very active demand, is added to nominal clearness, the consequence of a superabundance of the precious metals. Scarcity of money implies that little is necessary for each purchase. Then in B, a nominal cheapness is combined with real cheapness. Under these circumstances, industry will have the strongest possible motives for deserting A, to establish itself in B. Now, to return to what would be the true course of things. As the progress of such events is always gradual, industry from its nature being opposed to sudden transits, let us suppose that, without waiting the extreme point, it will have gradually divided itself between A and B, according to the laws of supply and demand ; that is to say, according -to the laws of justice and usefulness. I do not advance an empty hypothesis when I say, that were it possible that industry should con- centrate litself upon a single point, there must, from its nature, arise spontaneously, and in its midst, an irresistible power of decentralization. We will quote the words of a manufacturer to the Ciiamber of Commerce at Manchester (the figures brought into his demonstration are suppressed) : ( i " Formerly we exported goods ; this exportation gave way to that of thread for the manufacture of goods ; later, instead of thread, we exported ma- chinery for the making of thread ; then capital for 42 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTIOX. the construction of machinery ; and lastly, workmen and talent, which are the source of capital. All these elements of labor have, one after the other, transferred themselves to other points, where their profits were increased, and where the means of sub- sistence being less difficult to obtain, life is main- tained at a less cost. There are at present to be seen in Prussia, Austria, Saxony, Switzerland, and Italy, immense manufacturing establishments, found- ed entirely by English capital, worked by English labor, and directed by English talent" We may here perceive, that Nature, or rather Providence, with more wisdorp and foresight than the nan'ow rigid system of the protectionists can suppose, does not permit the concentration of labor, the monopoly of advantages, from which they draw their arguments as from an absolute and irremedia- ble fact It has, by means as simple as they are infallible, provided for dispersion, diflfusion, mutual dependence, and simultaneous progress ; all of which, your restrictive laws paralyze as much as is in their power, by their tendency towards the isola- tion of nations. By this means they render much more decided the differences existing in the condi- tions of production ; they check the self-leveling power of industry, prevent fusion of interests, and fence in each nation within its own peculiar advan- tages and disadvantages. EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PRODUCTION. 43 III. To say that by a protective law the condi- tions of production are equalized, is to disguise an error under false terms. It is not true that an im- port duty equalizes the conditions of production. These remain after the imposition of the duty just as they were before. The most that the law can do is to equalize the conditions of sale. If it should be said that I am playing upon words, I retort the ac- cusation upon my adversaries. It is for them to prove ihdX production and sale are synonymous terms, ■which if they cannot do, I have a right to accuse them, if not of playing upon words, at least of con- founding them. Let me' be permitted to exemplify my idea. Suppose that several Parisian speculators should determine to devote themselves to the production of oranges. They know that the oranges of Portugal can be sold in Paris at ten centimes, whilst on account of the boxes, hot-houses, etc., which are necessary to ward against the severity of our climate, it is impossi- ble to raise them at less than a franc apiece. They accordingly demand a duty of ninety centimes upon Portugal oranges. With the help of this duty, say they, the conditions of production will be equalized. The legislative body, yielding as usual to this argu- ment, imposes a duty of ninety centimes on each foreign orange. Now I say that the relative conditions of produc- tion are in no wise changed. The law can take noth- M SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. ing from the heat of the sun in Lisbon, nor from the severity of the frosts in Paris. Oranges continuing to mature themselves naturally on the banks of the Tagus, and artificially upon those of the Seine, must continue to require for their production much more labor on the latter than the former. The law can only equalize the conditions of sale. It is evident that while the Portuguese sell their oranges at a franc apiece, the ninety centimes which go to pay the tax are taken from the French consumer. Now look at the whimsicality of the result. Upon each Portu- guese orange, the country loses nothing; for the ninety centimes which the consumer pays to satisfy the tax, enter into the treasury. There is improper distribution, but no loss. Upon each French orange consumed, there will be about ninety centimes lost; for while the buyer very certainly loses them, the seller just as certainly does not gain them, for even according to the hypothesis, he will receive only the price of production. I will leave it to the prot«;- tionists to draw their conclusion. IV. I have laid some stress upon this distinction between the conditions of production and those of sale, which perhaps the prohibitionists may consider as paradoxical, because it leads me on to what they will consider as a still stranger paradox. This is : If you really wish to equalize the facilities of pro- duction, leave trade free. This may surprise the protectionists ; but let me EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PRODUCTION. 45 entreat them to listen, if it be only through curiosity, to the end of my argument It shall not be long. I will now take it up where we left off. If we suppose for the moment, that the common and daily profits of each Frenchman amount to one franc, it will indisputably follow that to produce an orange by direct labor in France, one day's work, or its equivalent, will be requisite ; whilst to produce the cost of a Portuguese orange, only one-tenth of this day's labor is required ; which means simply this, that the sun does at Lisbon what labor does at Paris. Now is it not evident, that if I can produce an orfinge, or, what is the same thing, the means of buying it, with one- tenth of a day's labor, I am placed exactly in the same condition as the Portuguese producer himself, excepting the expense of the transportation ? It is then certain that freedom of commerce equal- izes the conditions of production direct or indirect, as mudh as it is possible to equalize them ; for it leaves but the one inevitable difference, that of transportation. I will add that free trade equalizes also the facilities for attaining enjoyments, comforts, and general con- sumption ; the last an object whichis, it would seem, quite forgotten, and which is nevertheless all impor- tant; since consumption is the main obiject of all our industrial efforts. Thanks to freedom of trade, we would enjoy here the results of the Portuguese sun, as well as Portugal itself; and the inhabitants 46 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTIOX. of Havre, -would have in their reach, as well as those- of London, and -with the same facilities, the advan- tages which nature has in a mineralogical point of view conferred upon Newcastle. The protectionists may suppose me in a paradoxi- cal humor, for I go farther still I say, and I sincere- ly believe, that if any two countries are placed in un- equal circumstances as to advantages of production, that one of the two which is the least favored by nature, will gain most by freedom of commerce. To prove this, I shall be obliged to turn somewhat aside from the forni of reasoning which belongs to this work. I will do so, however; first, because the question in discussion turns upon this point ; and again, because it will give me the opportunity of exhibiting a law of pohtical economy of the highest importance, and which, well understood, seems to me to be destined to lead back to this science all those sects which, in our days, are seeking in the land of chimeras that social harmony which they have been unable to dis- cover in nature. I speak of the law of consump- tion, which the majority of political economists may well be reproached with having too much neglected. Consumption is the end, the final cause, of all the phenomena of political economy, and, consequently, in it is found their final solution. No effect, whether favorable or unfavorable, can be arrested permanently upon the producer. The advantages and the disadvantages, which, from his EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PEOHUCTION. 4? relations to nature and to society, are his, both equally- pass gradually from him, with an almost insensible tendency to be absorbed and fused into the commu- nity at large ; the community considered as con- sumers. This is an admirable law, alike in its cause and its effects, and he who shall succeed in making it well understood, will have a right to say, "I have not, in my passage through the world, forgotten to pay my tribute to society." Every circumstance which favors the work of pro- duction is of course hailed with joy by the producer, for its immediate effect is to enable him to render greater services to the community, and to exact from it a greater remuneration. Every circumstance which injures production, must equally be the source of uneasiness to him ; for its immediate effect is to diminish his services, and consequently his remu- neration. This is a fortunate and necessary law of nature. The immediate good or evil of favorable or unfavorable circumstances must fall upon the pro- ducer, in order to influence him invincibly to seek the one and to avoid the other. Again, when a workman succeeds in his labor, the immediate benefit of this success is received by him. This again is necessary, to determine him to devote . his attentioii to it. It is also just ; because it is just that an effort crowned with success should bring its own reward. But these effects, good and bad, although perma- 48 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECTION. nent iii themselves, are not so as regards the producer. If they had been so, a principle of progressive and consequently infinite inequality would have been in- troduced among men. This good, and this evil, both therefore pass on, to become absorbed in the general destinies of humanity. How does this come about? I will try to make it understood by some examples. Let us go back to the thirteenth century. Men who gave themselves up to the business of copying, received for this service a remuneration regulated by the general rate of profits. Among them is found one, who seeks and finds the means of multiplying rap- idly copies of the same work. He invents printing. The first effect of this is, that the individual is en- riched, while many more are impoverished. At the first view, wonderful as the discovery is, one hesi- tates in deciding whether it is not more injurious than useful. It seems to have introduced into the world, as I said above, an element of infinite ine- quality. Guttenberg makes large profits bv this invention, and perfects the invention by the profits, until all other copyists are ruined. As for the pub- lic, — ^the consumer, — it gains but little, for Gutten- berg takes care to lower the price of books only just so much as is necessary to undersell all rivals. But the great Mind which put harmony into the movements of celestial bodies, could also give it to the internal mechanism of society. We will see the EQTTALIZING FACILITIES OF PRODUCTION. 49 advantages of this invention escaping from the in- dividual, to become forever the common patrimony of mankind. The process finally becomes known. Guttenberg is no longer alone in his art; others imitate him. Their profits are at first considerable. They are recompensed for being the first who make the effort to imitate the processes of the newly invented art. This again was necessary, in order that they might be induced to the effort, and thus forward the great and final result to which we approach. They gain much ; but they gain less than the inventor, for com- petilion has commenced its work. The price of books now continually decreases. The gains of the imitators diminish in proportion as the invention becomes older ; and in the same proportion imitation becomes less meritorious. Soon the new object of industry attains its normal condition ; in other words, the remuneration of printers is no longer an exception to the general rules of remuneration, and, like that of copyists formerly, it is only regulated by the gen- eral rate of profits. Here then the producer, as such, holds only the old position. The discovery, how- ever, has been made; the saving of time, labor, effort, for a fixed result, for a certain number of volumes, is realized. But in what is this manifest- ed? In the cheap price of books. For the good of whom ? For the good of the consumer, — of society, — of humanity. Printers, having no longer 50 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECTION. any peculiar merit, receive no longer a peculiar remuneration. As men, — as consumers,— they no doubt participate in the advantages which the inven- tion confers upon the community; but that is all As printers, as producers, they are placed upon the ordinary footing of all other producei-s. Society pays them for their labor, and not for the usefulness of the invention. That has become a gratuitous benefit, a common heritage to mankind. What has been said of printing can be extended to every agent for the advancement of labor ; from the nail and the mallet, up to the locomotive and the electric telegraph. Society enjoys all, by the abundance of its use, its consumption ; and it enjoys all gratuitously. For as their effect is to diminish prices, it is evident that just so much of the price as is- taken off by their intervention, renders the production in so far gratuitous. There only remains the actual labor of man to be paid for ; and the re- mainder, which is the result of the invention, is sub- tracted ; at least after the invention has run through the cycle which I have just described as its destined course. I send for a workman ; he brings a saw with him; I pay him two francs for his day's labor, and he saws me twenty -five boards. If the saw had not been invented, he would perhaps not have been able to make one board, and I Nvould have paid him the same for his day's labor. The itse/uhuss then of the saw, is for me a gratuitous gift of nature, or EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PRODUCTION. -51 rather it is a portion of the inheritance which, in com- ■ mon with my brother men, I have received from the genius of my ancestors. I have two workmen in my field ; the one directs the handle of a plough, the other that of a spade. The result of their day's labor is very different, but the price is the same, be- cause the remuneration is proportioned, not to the usefulness of the result, but to the effort^ the labor given to attain it. I invoke the patience of the reader, and beg him to believe, that I have not lost sight of free trade: I entreat him only to remember the conclusion at which I have arrived : Remuneration, is not propor- tioried to the usefulness of the articles brought by the producer into the market^i but to the labor.* I have so far taken my examples from human inventions, but will now go on to speak of natural advantages. In every article of production, nature and man must concur. But the portion of nature is always gratuitous. Only so much of the usefulness of an article as is the result of human labor becomes the object of mutual exchange, and consequently of remuneration. The remuneration varies much, no doubt; in proportion to the intensity of the labor, of the skill which it requires, of its being d propos * It is true that labor does not receive a uniform remuneration ; because labor is more or less intense, dangerous, skillful, etc. Competition estlib- lishtis for eacii category ji prico curjfent;.an.d it is of this variable price, that I speak. 52 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION-. to Ae demand of the day, of the need which exists for it, of the momenUry absence of competition, etc. But it is not the less true in principle, that the assistance received from natural laws, which belongs ' to all, counts for nothing in the price. "We do not pay for the air we breathe, although BO useful to us, that we could not live two minutes without it We do not pay for it, because Nature furnishes it without the intervention of man's labor. But if we wish to separate one of the gases which compose it, for instance, to fill a balloon, we must take some trouble and labor ; or if another takes it for us, we must give him an equivalent in something which will have cost us the ti'ouble of production. From which we see that the exchange is between troubles, efforts, labors. It is certainly not for hy- drogen gas that I pay, for this is every -^rhere at my disposal, but for the work that it has been neces- sary to accomplish in order to disengag 3 it ; work which I have been spared, and which I m ast refund. If I am told that there are other things to pay for; as expense, materials, apparatus ; I answer, that still in these things it is the work that I pay for. The price of the coal employed is only the representation of the labor necessary to dig and transport it We do not pay for the light of the sun, because Nature alone gives it to us. But we pay for the light of gas, tallow, oil, wax, beOause here ij labor to be remunerated ;— and remark, that it ia so entirely EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PRODUCTION. 53 labor and not utility to which remuneration is pro- portioned, that it may well liappen that one of these means of lighting, while it may be much more effect- ive than another, may still cost less. To cause this, it is only necessary that less human labor should be required to furnish it When the water-carrier comes to supply my house, were I to pay him in proportion to the absolute utility of the water, my whole fortune would not be sufB.- cient. But I pay hitn only for the trouble he has taken. If he requires more, I can get others to fur- nish it, or finally go and get it myself The water itself is not the subject of our bargain ; but the labor taken to get the water. This point of view is so important, and the consequences that I am going to draw from it so clear, as regards the freedom of international exchanges, that I will still elucidate my idea by a few more examples. The alimentary substance contained in potatoes does not cost us very dear, because a great deal of it is attainable with little work. We pay more for wheat, because, to produce it Nature requires more labor from man. It is evident that if Nature did for the latter what she does for the former, their prices would tend to the same level. It is impossible that the producer of wheat should permanently gain, more than the producer of potatoes. The law of competitioa cannot allow it If by a bappy mir^acle the ;;fertility of ,all arable 54 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. lands were to be increased, it would not be the agriculturist, but the consumer, who would profit by this phenomenon ; for the result of it would be, abundance and cheapness. There would be less labor incorporated into an acre of grain, and the agriculturist would be therefore obliged to exchange it for a less labor incorporated into some other articla If, on the contrary, the fertility of the soil were sud- denly to deteriorate, the share of Nature in produc- tion would be less, that of labor greater, and the iresult would be higher prices. I am right then in saying that it is in consumption, in mankind, that at length all political phenomena find their solution. As long as we fail to follow their effects to this point, and look only at immediate efl:ects, which act but upon individual men or classas of men as pro- ducers, we know nothing more of political economy . than the quack does of medicine, when, instead of following the effects of a prescription in its action upon the whole system, he satisfies himself with knowing how it affects the palate and the throat The tropical regions are very favorable to the pro- duction of sugar and coffee ; that is to say, Nature does most of the business and leaves but little for labor to accomplish. But who refaps the advantage of this liberality of Nature? Not these regions, for they are forced by competition to receive simply remuneration for their labor. It is mankind who is the gainer j for the result of thi^ liberality is dieap- ness, and cheapness belongs to the world. EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PRODUCTION 55 Here in the temperate zone, we find coal and iron ore, on the surface of the soil ; we have but to stoop and take them. At first, I grant, the immediate inhabitants profit by this fortunate circumstance. But soon comes competition, and the price of coal and iron falls, until this gift of Nature becomes gratuitous to all, and human labor is only paid according to the general rate of profits. Thus natural advantages, like improvements in the process of production, are, or have a constant tendency to become, under the law of competition, the common and gratuitous patrimony of consumers, of society, of mankind. Countries therefore which do not enjoy these advantages, must gain by com- merce with those which do ; because the exchanges of commerce are between labor and labor; subtrac- tion being made of all the natural advantages which are combined with these labors ; and it is evidently the most favored countries which can incorporate into a given labor the largest proportion of these natural advantages. Their produce representing less labor, receives less recompense ; in other words, is cheaper. If then all the liberality of Nature results in cheapness, it is evidently not the producing, but the consuming country, which profits by her benefits. Hence we may see the enormous absurdity of the consuming country, which rejects produce precisely because it is cheap. It is as though we should say : " We will have nothing of that which Nature gives 56 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. you. Tou ask of us an effort equal to two, in order to furnish ourselves with articles only attainable at home by an effort equal to four. You can do it because with you Kature does half the work. But we will have nothing to do with it ; we wilj wait till your climate, becoming more inclement, forces you to ask of us a labor equal to four, and then we can treat with you upon an equal footing." A is a favored country; B is maltreated by Nature. Mutual trafBc then is advantageous to both, but principally to B, because the exchange is not between utility and utility, but between value and value. Now A furnishes a greater utility in a simi- lar value, because the utility of any article includes at once what Nature and what labor have done ; whereas the value of it only corresponds to the por tion accomplished by labor. B then makes an entirely advantageous bargain ; for by simply paying the producer from A for his labor, it receives in return not only the results of that labor, but in addition there is thrown in whatever may have accrued from the superior bounty of Nature. We will lay down the general rula Traffic is an exchange of values ; and as value is reduced by competition to the simple representation of labor, traffic is the exchange of equal labors. Whatever Nature has done towai-ds the production of the articles exchanged, is given on both sides gratuitously; from whence it necessarily foliows, that EQUALIZING FACILITIES OF PRODTJCTIOK 57 the most advantageous commerce is transacted with those countries which are the most favored by Nature. The theory of which I have attempted, in this chapter, to trace the outlines, would require great developments. But perhaps the attentive reader will have perceived in it the fruitful seed which is destined in its future growth to smother Protection, at once with Fourierism, Saint Simonism, Common- ism, and the various other schools whose object is to exclude the law.of Competition from the govern- ment of the world. Competition, no doubt, consid- ering man as producer, must often interfere with his individual and immediate interests. But if we consider the great object of all labor, the universal good, in a word, Consumption, we cannot fail to find that Competition is to the moral world what the law of equilibrium is to the material one. It is the foundation of true Commomism, of true Socialism, of the equality of comforts and condition, so much sought after in our day; and if so many sincere reformers, so many earnest friends to the public rights, seek to reach their end by commercial legisla- tion, it is only because they do not yet understand commercial freedom. 58 SOPHISMS OF FEOTECTICK. V. OUR PRODTTCTIONS ARE OVERLOADED WITH TAXES. This is but a new wording of the last Sophism. The demand made is, that the foreign article should be taxed, in order to neutralize the effects of the tax, which weighs down national produce. It is still then but the question of equalizing the fiicili- ties of production. We have but to say that the tax is an ai*tLflcial obstacle, which has exactly the same effect as a natural obstacle, L e. the increasing of the price. If this increase is so great that there is more loss in producing the article in question than in attracting it from foreign parts by the pro- duction of an equivalent value, let it alon& Indi- vidual interest will soon learn to choose the lesser of two evils. I might refer the reader to the preceding demonstration for an answer to this Sophism ; but it is one which recurs so often in the complaints and the petitions, I had almost said the demands, of the protectionist school, that it deserves a special discussion. If the tax in question should be one of a special kind, directed against fixed articles of production, I agree that it is perfectly reasonable that foreign produce should be subjected to it For instance, it would be absurd to free foreign salt from impost PRODUCTIONS OVBSLOADED WITH TAXES. 59 duty ; not that in an economical point of view France would lose any thing by it ; on the contrary, whatever may be said, principles are invariable, and France would gain by it, as she must always gain by avoiding an obstacle whether natural or artifi- cial. But here the obstacle has been raised with a fiscal object. It is necessary that this end should be attained ; and if foreign salt were to be sold in our market free from duty, the treasury would not receive its revenue, and would be obliged to seek it from some thing else. There would be evident inconsistency in creating an obstacle with a given object, and then avoiding the attainment of that object. It would have been better at once to seek what was needed in the other impost without tax- ing French salt. Such are the circumstances under which I would allow upon any foreign article a duty, not protecting but fiscal But the supposition that a nation, because it is subjected to heavier imposts than those of another neighboring nation, should protect itself by tariffs against the competition of its rival, is a Sophism,^ which it is now my purpose to attack. I have said more than once, that I am opposing only the theory of the protectionists, with the hope of discovering the source of their errors. Were I disposed to enter into controversy with them, I would say : Why direct your tariffs principally against England and Belgium, both countries more 60 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. overloaded with taxes than any in the world? Have I not a right to look upon your argument aa a mere pretext ? But I am not of the number of those who believe that prohibitionists are guided by interest, and not by conviction. The doctrine of Protection is too popular not to be sincere. If the majority, could believe in freedom, we would be free. Without doubt it is individual interest which weighs us down with tariffs ; but it acts upon con- viction. The State may make either a good or a bad use of taxes ; it makes a good use of them when it ren- ders to the public services equivalent to the value received from them ; it makes a bad use of them when it expends this value, giving nothing in return. To say in the first case that they place the coun- try which pays them in more disadvantageous con- ditions for production, than the country which is free from them, is a Sophism. We pay, it is ti-ue, twenty millions for the administration of justice, and the maintenance of the police, but we have justice and the police; we have the security which they give, the time which they save for us ; and it is most probable that production is neither more easy nor more active among nations, where (if there be such) each individual takes the administration of justice into his own hands. We pay, I grant, many hundred millione for roads, bridges, ports, PRODUCTIONS OVERLOADED WITH TAXE'3. 61 railways ; but we have these railways, these ports, bridges and roads, and unless we maintain that it is a losing business to establish them, -A^e cannot say that they place us in a position inferior to that of nations who have, it is true, no taxes for public works, but who likewise have no public works.^ And here we see why (even while we accuse inter- nal taxes of being a cause of industrial inferiority) we direct our tariffs precisely against those nations which are the most taxed. It is because these taxes, well used, far from injuring, have ameliorated the conditions of production to these nations. Thus we again arrive at the conclusion that the protectionist Sophisms not only wander from, but are the con- trary — the very antithesis of truth. As to unproductive imposts, suppress them if you can ; but surely it is a most singular idea to sup- pose, that their evil effect is to be neutralized by the addition of individual taxes to public taxes. Many thanks for the compensation ! The State, you say, has taxed us too much ; surely this is no reason why we should tax each other ! A protective duty is a tax directed against for- eign produce, but which returns, let us keep in mind, upon the national consumer. Is it not then a singular argument, to say to him, " Because the taxes are heavy, we will raise prices higher for you ; and because the State takes a part of your revenue, we will give another portion of it to benefit a mo- nopoly ? 62 SOPHISMS OF PHOTECTIOIT. But let -US examine more closely this Sophism so accredited among our legislators ; although, strange to say, it is precisely those who keep up the unpro- ductive imposts (according to our present hypoth- esis) who attribute to them afterwards our sup- posed inferiority, and seek to re-establish the equil- ibrium by further imposts and new clogs. It appears to me to be evident that protection, without any change in its nature and effects, might have taken the form of a direct tax, raised by the State, and distributed as a premium to privileged industry. Let us admit that foreign iron could be sold in our market at eight francs, but not lower ; and French iron at not lower than twelve francs. In this hypothesis there are two ways in which the State can secure the national market to the home producer. The first, is to put upon foreign iron a duty of five francs. This, it is evident, would exclude it, because it could no longer be sold at less than thirteen francs ; eight francs for the cost price, five for the tax; and at this price it must be driven from the market by French iron, which we have supposed to cost twelve francs. In this case the buyer, the consumer, will have paid all the expenses of the protection given. The second means would be to lay upon the public a tax of five francs, aud to give it as a pre- PEODUCTIOJSrS OVERLOADED WITH TAXES. 63 mium to the iron manufacturer. The effect would in either case be equally a protective measure. Foreign iron would, according to both systems, be alike excluded; for our iron manufacturer could sell at seven francs, what, with the iive francs pre- mium, would thus bring him in twelva While the price of sale being seven francs, foreign iron could not obtain a market at eight In these two systems the principle is the same ; the effect is the same. There is but this single difference ; in the first case the expense of protection is paid by a part, in the second by the whole o'f the corhmunity. I frankly confess my preference for the second system, which I regard as more just, more economical and more legal. More just, because, if society wishes to give bounties to some of its members, the whole community ought to contribute ; more eco- nomical, because it would banish many difficulties, and save the expenses of collection; more legal, lastly, because the public would see clearly into the operation, and know what was required of it But if the protective system had taken this form, would it not have been laughable enough to hear it said, "We pay heavy taxes for the army, the navy, the judiciary, the public works, the schools, the public debt, etc. These amount to more than a thousand million. It would therefore be desirable that the State should take another thousand million, 64 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. to relieve the poor irou manufacturers ; or the suffer- ing stockholders of coal mines ; or those unfortunate lumber dealers, or the useful codfishery." This, it must be perceived, by an attentive inves- tigation, is the result of the Sophism in question. In vain, gentlemen, are all your efforts ; you cannot give money to one without taking it from another. If you are absolutely determined to exhaust the funds of the taxable community, well ; but, at least, do not mock them ; do not tell them, " We take from you again, in order to compensate you for what we have already taken." It would be a too tedious undertaking to endeavor to point out all the fallacies of this Sophism. I wiU therefore limit myself to the consideration of it in three points. You argue that France is overburthened with taxes, and deduce thence the conclusion that it is necessary to protect such and such an article of pro- duce. But protection does not relieve us fiom the payment of these taxes. If, then, individuals de- voting themselves to any one object of industry, should advance this demand : " We, from our par- ticipation in the payment of taxes, have our expenses of production increased, and therefore ask for a protective duty which shall raise our price of sale ;" what is this but a demand on their part to be allowed to free themselves from the bui-then of the tax, by laying it on the rest of the community? PRODUCTIONS OVEBLOAilED WITH TAXES. 6!i Their object is to balance, by the increased price of their produce, the amount which they pay in taxes. Now, as the whole amount of these taxes must enter into the treasury, and the increase of price must be paid by society, it follows that (where this protective duty is imposed) society has to bear, not only the general tax, but also that for the protec- tion of the article in question. But it is answered, let every thing be protected. Firstly, this is impos- sible ; and, again, were it possible, how could such a system give relief?' /will pay for you, you will pay for me; but not the less, still there remains the tax to be paid. Thus you are the dupes of an illusion. You determine to raise taxes for the support of an army, a navy, the church, ■university, judges, roads, etc. Afterwards you seek to disburthen from its portion of the tax, first one article of industry, then another, then a third ; always adding to the burthen of the mass of society. You thus only create intermina- ble complications. If yon can prove -that the increase of price resulting from protection, falls upon the foreign producer, I grant something spe- cious in your argument. But if it be true that the French people paid the tax before the passing of the protective duty, and. afterwards that it has paid not only the tax, but the protective duty also, truly I do not perceive wherein it has profited. But I go much further, and maintain that the 66 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION'. more oppressive our taxes are, the more anxiously ought we to open our ports and frontiers to foreign nations, less burthened than ourselves. And why ? In order that we may share with them, as much as possible, the burthen which we bear. Is it not an incontestable maxim in political economy, that taxes must, in the end, fall upon the consumer? The greater then our commerce, the greater the portion which will be reimbursed to us, of taxes incorpo- rated in the produce, which we will have sold to foreign consumers; whilst we, on our part, wUl have made to them only a lesser reimbursement, because (according to our hypothesis) their produce is less taxed than ours. ^ Again, finally, has it ever occurred to you to ask yourself, whether these heavy taxes which you adduce as a reason for keeping up the prohibitive system, may not be the result of this very system itself? To what purpose would be our great stand- ing armies, and our powerful navies, if commerce were free ? BALANCE OP TRADE. 67 VL BALANCE OF TRADE. Our adversaries have adopted a system of tactics, whicli embarrasses us not a little. Do we prove our doctrine ? They admit the truth of it in the most respectful manner. Do we attack their princi- ples ? They abandon them with the best possible grace. They only ask that our doctrine, which they acknowledge to be true, should be confined to books ; and that their principles, which they allow to be false, should be established in practice. If we will give up to them the regulation of our tariffs, they will leave us triumphant in the domain of theory. "Assuredly," said Mr. Gauthier de Eoumilly, lately, " assuredly no one wishes to call up from their graves the defunct theories of the balance of trade." And yet Mr. Gauthier, after giving this passing blow to error, goes on immediately after- wards, and for two hours consecutively, to reason as though this error were a truth. Give me Mr. Lestiboudois. Here we have a con- sistent reasoner ! a logical argnier ! There is noth- ing in his conclusions which cannot be found in his premises. He asks . nothing in practice which he does not justify in theory. His principles may per- 68 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. chance be false, and this is the point in question. But he has a principle. He believes, he proclaims aloud, that if France gives ten to receive fifteen, she loses five ; and surely, with such a belief, noth- ing is more natural than that he should make laws consistent with it. He says : " What it is important to remark, is, that constantly the amount of importation is aug- menting, and surpassing that of exportation. Every year France buys more foreign produce, and sells less of its own produce. This can be proved by figures. In 1842, we see the importation exceed the exportation by two hundred millions. This appears to me to prove, in the clearest manner, that national labor is not sufficiently protected, that we are provided by foreign labor, and that the competi- tion of our rivals oppresses our industry. The law in question, appears to me to be a consecration of the fact, that our political economists have assumed a false position in declaring, that in proportion to pro- duce bought, there is always a corresponding quan- tity sold. It is evident that purchases may be made, not with the habitual productions of a country, not with its revenue, not with the results of actual labor, but with its capital, with the accumulated savings which should serve for reproduction. A country may spend, dissipate its profits and savings, may impoverish itself, and by the consumption of its national capital, progress gradually to its ruin. Tliis BALANCE OF TRADE. 69 is precisely what we are doing. We give, every year, two hundred millions to foreign nations." Well ! here, at least, is a man whom we can under- stand. There is no hypocrisy in this language. The balance of trade is here clearly maintained and defended. France imports two hundred millions more than she exports. Then France loses two hundred millions yearly. And the remedy? It is to check importation. The conclusion is perfectly consistent. It is, then, with Mr. Lestiboudois that we will argue, for how is it possible to do so with Mr. Gau- thier? If you say to the latter, the balance of trade is a mistake, he will answer, So I have declared it in my exordium. If you exclaim. But it is a truth, he will say. Thus I have classed it in my conclusions. Political economists may blame me for argjiing with Mr. Lestiboudois. To combat the balance of trade, is, they say,.neither more nor less than to fight against a windmill. But let us be on our guard. The balance of trade is neither so old, nor so sick, nor so dead, as [ Mr. Gauthier is pleased to imagine ; for all the legis- lature, Mr. Gauthier himself included, are associated by their votes with the theory of Mr. Lestiboudois. However, not to fatigue the reader, I will not seek to investigate too closely this theory, but will content myself with subjecting it to the experience of facts. 70 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. It is constantly alleged in opposition to our prin- ciples, that they are good only in theory. But, gen- tlemen, do you believe that merchants' books are good in practice? It does appear to me that if there is any thing which can have a practical author- ity, when the object is to prove profit and loss, that this must be commercial accounts. "We cannot suppose that all the merchants of the world, for centuries back, should have so little understood their own affairs, as to have kept their books in such a manner as to represent gains as losses, and losses as gains. Truly it would be easier to believe that Mr. Lestiboudois is a bad political economist A merchant, one of my friends, having had two business transactions, witli very different rraults, I have been curious to compare on this subject the accounts of the counter with those of the cus- tom-house, interpreted by Mr. Lestiboudois with the sanction of our six hundred legislators. Mr. T . .despatched from Havre a vessel, freighted, for the United States, with French merchandise, principally Parisian articles, valued at 200,000 francs. Such was the amount entered at the custom-housa The cargo, on its arrival at New Orleans, had paid ten per cent, expenses, and was liable to thirty per cent, duties ; which raised its value to 280,000 francs. It was sold at twenty per cent profit on its original value, which being 40,000 francs, the price of sale was 320,000 francs, which the assignee converted BALANCE OF TBADE. 71 into cotton. This cotton, again, had to pay for expenses of transportation, insurance, commissions, etc., ten per cent : so that when the return cargo arrived at Havre, its value had risen to 352,000 francs, and it was thus entered at the custom-house. Finally, Mr. T. . .realized again on this return cargo twenty per cent profits ; amounting to 70,400 francs. The cotton thus sold for the sum of 422,400 francs. If Mr. Lestiboudois requires it, I will send him an extract from the books of Mr. T . . . He will there see, credited to the account of profit and loss, that is to say, set down as gained, two sums; the one of 40,000, the other of 70,000 francs, and Mr. T . . . feels perfectly certain that as regards these, there is no mistake in his accounts. Now what conclusion does Mr. Lestiboudois draw from the sums entered into the custom-house, in this operation? He thence learns that France has exported 200,000 francs, and imported 352,000; from whence the honorable deputy concludes " that she has spent, dissipated the profits of her previous savings ; that she is impoverishing herself and progress- ing to her ruin; and that she has squandered on a foreign nation 152,000 francs of her capital." Some time after this transaction, Mr. T . . . des- patched another vessel, again freighted with domestic produce, to the amount of 200,000 francs. But the vessel' foundered after leaving the port, and Mr. T . . . had only farther to inscribe on his books two little items, thus worded : 72 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. " Sundries due to X, 200,000 francs, for purchase of divers articles despatched by vessel N. " Profil and loss due to sundries, 200,000 francs^ for final and total loss of cargo." In the meantime the custom-house inscribed - 200,000 francs upon its list of exportations, and as there can of course be nothing to balance this entry on the list of importations, it hence follows that Mr. Lcstiboudois and the Chamber must see in this wreck a clear profit to Prance of 200,000 francs. Wo may draw hence yet another conclusion, viz, : that according to the Balance of Trade theory, France has an exceedingly simple manner of con- stantly doubling her capital It is only necessary, to accomplish this, that she should, after entering into the custom-house her articles for exportation, cause them to be thrown into the sea. By this course, her exportations can speedily be made to equal her capital ; importations will be nothing, and our gain will be, all which the ocean will have swallowed up. You are joking, the protectionists will reply. You know that it is impossible that we should utter such absurdities. Nevertheles, I answer, you do utter them, and what is more, you give them life, you exercise them practically upon vour fellow citizens, as much, at least, as is in your power to do. The truth is, that the theory of the Balance of Trade should be precisely reversed. The profits accruing to the nation from any foreign commerce PETITION. 73 should be calculated by tbe overplus of the import- ation above the exportation. This overplus, after the deduction of expenses, is the real gain. Here we have the true theory, and it is one which leads dii'ectly to freedom in trade. I now, gentlemen, abandon you this theory, as I have done all those of the preceding chapters. Do with it as you please, exaggerate it as you will ; it has nothing to fear. Push it to the farthest extreme ; imagine, if it so please you, that foreign nations should inundate us with useful produce of every description, and ask nothing in return ; that our importations should be infinite, arid our exportations nothing. Imagine all this, and still I defy you to prove that we will be the poorer in consequence. VII. PETITION FROM THE MANUFACTURERS. OF CANDLES, WAX-LIGHTS, LAMPS, CHANDELIERS, REFLECTORS, SNtrfFERS, EXTINGUISHERS ; AND FROM THE PRO- DUCBKS OF TALLOW", OIL, RESIN, ALCOHOL, AND GENERALLY OF ETERY THING USED FOR LIGHTS. To the SonoraUe the Members of the Clmmber of Depvties : "Gentlemen, — You are in the right way: you reject abstract theories ; abundance, cheapness, con- cerns you little. You are entirely occupied with 74 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECTION. tlie interest of the producer, wLom you are anxious to free from foreign competition. In a word, you wish to secure the national market to national labor. " We come now to offer you an admirable oppor- tunity for the application of your what shall we say ? your theory ? no, nothing is more deceiving than theory ; — ^your doctrine 'I your system ? your principle? But you do not like doctrines; you hold systems in horror; and, as for principles, you declare that there are no such things in political economy. "We will say then, your practice ; your practice without theory, and without principle. "We are subjected to the intolerable competition of a foreign rival, who enjoys, it would seem, such superior facilities for the production of light, that he is enabled to inundate our national market at so exceedingly reduced a price, that, the moment he makes his appearance, he draws off aU custom fi.-om us ; and thus an important branch of French indus- try, with all its innumerable ramifications, is sud- denly reduced to a state of complete stagnation. This rival, who is no other than the sun, carries on so bitter a war against us, that we have every reason to believe that he has been excited to this course by our perfidious neighbor England. (Good diplomacy this, for the present time I) In this belief we are confirmed by the fact that in all his transactions with this proud island, he is much more moderate and careful than with us. PETITION. 75 " Our petition is, that it would please your hon- orable body to pass a law whereby shall be directed the shutting up of all windows, dormers, sky-lights, shutters, curtains, vasistas, ceil-de-boeufs, in a word, all openings, holes, chinks and fissures through which the light of the sun is used to penetrate into i our dwellings, to the predjudice of the profitable •nanufactures which we flatter ourselves we have been enabled to bestow upon the country ; which country cannot, therefore, without ingratitude, leave ns now to struggle unprotected through so unequal a contest. " We pray your honorable body not to mistake t)ur petition for a satire, nor to repulse us without at least hearing the reasons which we have to advance in its favor. "And first, if, by shutting out as much as possible all access to natural light, you thus create the neces- sity for artificial light, is there in France an industrial pursuit which will not, through some connection with this important object, be benefited by it ? " If more tallow be consumed, there will arise a necessity for an increase of cattle and sheep. Thus artificial meadows must be in greater demand ; and meat, wool, leather, and above all, manure, this basis of agricultural riches, must become more abundant " If more oil be consumed, it will cause an increase in the cultivation of the olive-tree. This plant, luxuriant and exhausting to the soil, will come in 76 SOPHISMS OP PROTECTION. good time to profit by the increased fertility whicli the raising of cattle will have communicated to our fields. " Our heaths will become covered with resinous trees. Numerous swarms of bees will gather upon our mountains the perfumed treasures, which are now cast upon the winds, useless as the blossoms from which they emanate. There is, in short, no branch of agi-iculture which would not be greatly developed by the granting of our petition. "Navigation would equally profit Thousands of vessels would soon be employed in the whale fisheries, and thence would arise a navy capable of sustaining the honor of France, and of responding to the patriotic sentiments of the undei-signed peti- tioners, candle merchants, etc " But what words can express the magnificence which Paris will then exhibit 1 Cast an eye upon the future and behold the gildings, the bronzes, the magnificent crystal chandeliers, lamps, ■ reflectors and candelabras, which will glitter in the spacious stores, compared with which the splendor of the present day will appear trifling and insignificant " There is none, not even the poor manufacturer of resin in the midst of his pine forests, nor the miserable miner in his dark dwelling, but who would enjoy an increase of salary and of comforts. " Gentlemen, if you will be pleased to reflect, you cannot fail to be convinced that there is per- PETITIOK 77 haps not one -Frenchman, from the opulent stock holder of Anzin down to the poorest vender of matches, who is not interested in the success of oui petition. " We foresee your objections, gentlemen ; but * ,e is not one that you can oppose to us which ■ % will not be obliged to gather from the works .he partisans of free trade. We dare challenge I to pronounce one word against our petition, ich is not equally opposed to your own practice i the principle which guides your policy. "Do you tell us, that if we gain by this protec on, Prance will not gain, because the consumes lust pay the price of it ? " We answer you : " You have no longer any right to cite the inter "■'fc of the consumer. For whenever this has been xuund to compete with that of the producer, you have invariably sacrificed the first. You have done this to encourage labor, to increase the demand for labor. The same reason should now induce you to act in the same manner. " You have yourselves already answered the objection. When you were told : The 'consumer is interested in the free introductio'n of iron, coal, corn, wheat, cloths, etc., your answer was : Yes, but the producer is interested in their exclusion. Thus, also, if the consumer is interested in the admission of light, we, the producers, pray for its interdiction. 78 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION- "You have also said, the producer and the con- sumer are one. If the manufacturer gains by pro- tection, he will cause the agriculturist to gain also ; if agriculture prospers, it opens a market for manu- factured goods. Thus we, if you confer upon us the monopoly of furnishing light during the day, will as a first consequence buy large quantities of tallow, coals, oil, resin, wax, alcJohol, silver, iron, bronze, crystal, for the supply of our business ; and then we and our numerous contractors having become rich, our consumption will be great, and will become a means of contributing to the com- fort and competency of the workers in every branch of national labor. " Will you say that the light of the sun is a gratuitous gift, and that to repulse gratuitous gifts, is to repulse riches under pretence of encouraging the means of obtaining them ? " Take care,— you carry the death-blow to your own policy. Eemember that hitherto you have always repulsed foreign produce, because it was an approach to a gratuitous gift, and the more in pro- portion as this approach was more close. You have, in obeying the wishes of other monopolists, acted only from a half-motive; to grant our petition there is a much fuller inducement. To repulse us, precisely for the reason that our case is a more com- plete one than any which have preceded it, would be to lay down the following equation : -f X + = • PETITION. 79 iti other words, it would be to accumulate absurdity upon absurdity. " Labor and Nature concur in different propor- tions, according to country and climate, in every article of production. The portion 'of Nature is always gratuitous ; that of labor alone regulates the price. " If a Lisbon' orange can be sold at half the price of a Parisian one, it is because a natural and gratu- itous heat does for the one, what the other only obtains from an artificial and consequently expen- sive one. " When, therefore, we purchase a Portuguese orange, we may say that we obtain it hailf gratui- tously and half by the right of labor ; in other words, at half price compared to those of Paris. " Now it is precisely on account of this demi- gratuity (excuse the word) that you argue in favor of exclusion. How, you say, could national labor sustain the competition of foreign labor, when the first has every thing to do, and the last is rid of half the trouble, the sun taking the rest of the business upon himself? If then the demi-graiuily can determine you to check competition, on what principle can the entire gratuity be alleged as a rea- son for admitting it? You are no logicians if, refusing the demi-gratuity as hurtful to human labor, you do not d fortiori, and with double zeal, reject the full gratuity. 80 SOPHISMS OF PBOTECTION. "Again, when any article, as coal, iron, cheese, or cloth, comes to us from foreign countries with less labor than if we produced it ourselves, the dif- ference in price is a gratuitous gift conferred upon ■us ; and the gift is more or less considerable, accord- ing as the difference is greater or less. It is the quarter, the half, or the three-quarters of the value of the produce, in proportion as the foreign mer- chant requires the three-quarters, the half, or the quarter of the price. It is as complete as possible when the producer offers, as the sun does with light, the whole in free gift The question is, and we put it formally, whether you wish for France the benefit of gratuitous consumption, or the supposed advantages of laborious production. Choose, but be consistent. And does it not argue the great^t inconsistency to check as you do the importation of coal, iron, cheese, and goods of foreign manu- facture, merely because and event in proportioh as their price approaches sero, while at the same time you freely admit, and without limitation, the light of the sun, whose price is during the whole day at zero?" CISCRIMINATIKG DUTIES. 81 VIII. DISCRIMINATING DUTIES. A poor laborer of Gironde had raised, with the gi-eatest possible care and attention, a nursery of vines, from which, after much labor, he at last suc- ceeded in producing a pipe of wine, and forgot, in, the joy of his success, that each drop of this pre- cious nectar had cost a drop of sweat to his brow. I will sell it, said he to his wife, and with the pro- ceeds I will buy thread, which will serve you to make a trousseau for our daughter. The honest country- man, arriving in the city, there met an Englishman and a Belgian. The Belgian said to him, Give me your wine, and I in exchange, will give you fifteen bundles of thread. The Englishman said. Give it to me, and I will 'give you twenty bundles, for we English can spin cheaper than the Belgians. But a custom-house officer standing by, said to the laborer. My good fellow, make your ' exchange, if you choose, with the Belgian, but it is my duty to prevent your doing so with the Englishman. What! exclaimed the countryman, you wish me to take fifteen bundles of Brussels thread, when I can have twenty from Manchester ? Certainly ; do you not see that France would be a loser, if you were to receive twenty bundles instead of fifteen ? 9 82 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. I can scarcely understand this, said the labcrer. Nor can I explain it, said the custom-house officer, but there is no doubt of the fact ; for deputies, ministers, and editors, all agree that a people is impoverished in proportion as it receives a large compensation for any given quantity of its produca The countryman was obliged to conclude his bar- gain with the Belgian. His daughter received but three-fourths of her trousseau ; and these good folks are still puzzling themselves to discover how it can happen that people are ruined by receiving four instead of three ; and why they are richer with - three dozen towels instead of four. IX. WONDERFUL DISCOVERT 1 At this moment, when all minds are occupied in endeavoring to discover the most economical meana of transportation ; when, to put these means into practice, we are leveling roads, improving rivere, perfecting steamboats, establishing railroads, and attempting vaiious systems of traction, atmos- pheric, hydraulic, pneumatic, electric, etc, — at this moment when, I believe, every one is seeking in •WONBERFUL DISCOVEKY. 83 sincerity and with ardor the solution of this prob- lem — " To hring the price of things in their place of con- sumption, as near as possible to their price in that of production" — I would believe myself acting a culpable part towards my country, towards the age in which I live, and towards myself, if I were longer to keep secret the wonderful discovery which I hav^just made. I am well aware that the self illusions of invent- ors have become proverbial, but I have, neverthe- less, the most complete certainty of having discov- ered an infallible means of bringing the produce of the entire world into France, and reciprocally to transport ours, with a very important reduction of price. Infallible ! and yet this is but a single one of the advantages of my astonishing invention, which requires neither plans nor devices, neither prepara- tory studies, nor engineers, nor machinists, nor capital, nor stockholders, nor governmental assist- ance ! There is no danger of shipwrecks, of explo- sions, of shocks, of fire, nor of displacement of rails ! It can be put into practice without prepara- tion from one day to another ! Finally, and this will, no doubt, recommend it to the public, it will not increase taxes one cent ; but the contrary. It will not augment the number 84 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTIOX. of government functionaries, nor the exigencies of government officers ; but the contrary. It will put in hazard the liberty of no one ; but the contrary. I have been led to this discovery not from acci- dent, but observation, and I will tell you how. I had this question to determine : " Why does any article made, for instance, at Brussels, bear an increased price on its arrival at Parii?" It was immediately evident to me that this was the result of obstacles of various kinds existing between Brussels and Paris. First, there is distance, which cannot be overcome without trouble and loss of time ; and either we must submit to these in our own person, or pay another for bearing them for ua Then come rivers, swamps, accidents, heavy and muddy roads ; these are so many difficulties to be overcome ; in order to do which, causeways are con- structed, bridges built, roads cut and paved, railroads established, etc. But all this is costly, and the article transported must bear its portion of the expense. There are robbers, too, on the roads, and this necessitates guards, a police, etc Now, among these obstacles, there is one which we ourselves have placed, and that at no little expense, between Brussels and Paris. This consists of men planted along the frontier, armed to the teeth, whoso business it is to place difficulties in tlie way of the transportation of goods from one country to another. WONDERFUL DISCOVERY. 85 These men are called custom-house officers, and their effect is precisely similar to that of steep and boggy roads. They retard and put obstacles in the way of transportation, thus contributing to the difference which we have remarked between the price of pro- duction and that of consumption ; to diminish which difference as much as possible, is the problem which we are seeking to resolve. Here, then, we have found its solution. Let our tariff he diminished. "We will thus have constructed a Northern Railroad which will cost us nothing. Nay, more, we will be saved great expenses, and will begin from the first day to save capital. Eeally, I cannot but ask myself, in surprise, how our brains could have admitted so whimsical a piece of folly, as to induce us to pay many millions to destroy the natural obstacles interposed between France and other nations, only at the same time to pay so many millions more in order to replace them by artificial obstacles, which have exactly the same effect ; so that the obstacle removed, and the obstacle created, neutralize each other ; things go on as before, and the only result of our trouble, is, a double expense. An article of Belgian production is worth at Brussels twenty francs, and, from the evyenses of transportation, thirty francs at Paris. A similar article of Parisian manufacture costs forty francs. What is oiir course under these circumstances ? 86 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. First, we impose a duty of at least ten firancs on the Belgian article, so as to raise its price to a level with that of the Parisian ; the government withal, paying numerous officials to attend to the levying of this duty. The article thus pays ten francs for transportation, ten for the tax. This done, we say to ourselves : Transportation between Brussels and Paris is very dear ; let us spend two or three millions in railways, and we will reduce it one-half. Evidently the result of such a course will be to get the Belgian article at Paris for thirty-five francs, viz : 20 francs — ^price at Brussela 10 " duty. 5 " transportation by railroad. 35 francs — total, or market price at Paris. Could we not have attained the same end by low- ering the tariff to five francs? "We would then have — 20 francs — ^price at Brussels. 6 " duty. 10 " transportation on the common road. 35 francs — total, or market price at Paris. And this arrangement would have saved us the 200,000,000 spent upon the railroad, besides the expense saved in custom-house surveillance, which would of course diminish in proportion as the temptation to smuggling would become less. •WONDERFUL DISCOVERY. 87 Bat it is answered, the duty is necessary to pro- tect Parisian industry. So be it ; but do not then destroy the effect of it by your railroad. For if you persist in your determination to keep the Belgian article on a par with the Parisian at forty francs, you must raise the duty to fifteen francs, in order to have : — 20 francs — price at Brussels. 15 " protective duty. 6 " transportation by railroad. 40 francs — total, at equalized prices. And I now ask, of what benefit, under these circum- stances, is the railroad ? Frankly, is it not humiliating to the nineteenth century, that it should be destined to transmit to future ages the example of such puerilities seriously and gravely practiced ? To be the dupe of another, is bad enough ; but to employ all the forms and ceremonies of legislation in order to cheat one's self, — to doubly cheat one's self, and that too in a mere mathematical account, — truly this is calculated to lower a little the pride of this enlightened, age. SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION'. X. RECIPKOCITT. We have just seen that all which renders trans- portation difficult, acts in the same manner as pro- tection ; or, if the expression be preferred, that protection tends towards the same result as obstacles to transportation. A tariff may then be truly spoken of, as a swamp, a rut, a steep hill; in a word, an obstacle, whose effect is Jo augment the difference between the price of consumption and that of production. It is equally incontestable that a swamp, a bog, etc., are veritable protective tariffs. There are people (few in number, it is true, but such there are) who begin to understand that obstacles are not the less obstacles, because they are artifi- cially created, and that our well-being is more advanced by freedom of trade than by protection ; precisely as a canal is more desirable than a sandy, hilly, and difficult road. But they still say, this liberty ought to be recipro- cal If we take off our taxes in favor of Spain, while Spain does not do the same towards us,' it is evident that we are duped. Let us then make treaties of commerce upon the basis of a just reciproc- ity ; let us yield where we are yielded to ; let us RECIPEOCITY. by make the sacrifice of buying that w E may obtain the advantage of selling. Persons who reason thus, are (I am sorry to say), whether they know it or not, governed by the pro- tectionist principle. They are only a little more inconsistent than the pure protectionists, as these are more inconsistent than the absolute prohibitionists. I .will illustrate this by a fable. Stdlta and Puera (Fool-town and Boy-town). There were, it matters not where, two towns, Stulia and Puera, which at great expense had a road built which connected them with each other. Some time after this was done, the inhabitants of Stulta became uneasy, and said : Puera is overwhelming us with its productions ; this must be attended to. They established therefore a corps of Obstructors, so called because their business was to place obstacles in the way of the wagon trains which arrived from Puera. Soon after, Puera also established a corps of Obstructors; After some centuries, people having become more enlightened, the inhabitants of Puera began to dis- cover that these reciprocal obstacles might possibly be reciprocal injuries. They sent therefore an ambassador to Stulta, who (passing over the official phraseology) spoke much to this effect : " We have built a road, and now we put obstacles in the way 90 SOPHISMS OF FEOTECTIO]'acttce of all nations, greatly to the surprise of those who cannot conceive that in what concerns the wealth of nations, governments should, rather than be guided by the wisdom of authors, prefer the long experience of a system, etc It is above all inconceivable to them that the French government shoulld obstinately resist the new lights of political economy, and maintain in its practice the old errors, pointed out by all our writers But I am devoting too much time to this mercantile system, which, unsustained by writers, has only facts in its favor I " Would it not be supposed from this language that political economists, in claiming for each indi- vidual the free disposition of his own property, have, like the Fourierists, stumbled upon some new, strange, and chimerical system of social govern ment, some wild theory, without precedent in the annals of human nature ? It does appear to me, that, if in all this there is any thing doubtful, and of fanciful or theoretic origin, it is not free trade, but protection ; not the operating of exchanges, but the custom-house, the duties, imposed to overturn artificially the natural order of things. The question, however, is not here to compare and judge of the merits of the two systems, but simply to know which of the two is sanctioned by experience. You, Messrs. monopolists, maintain thsX facts are for you, and that' we on our side have only theory. 10 106 SOPHISMS OF PKOIECTION. You even flatter yourselves that this long series of public acts, this old experience of Europe which you invoke, appeared imposing to Mr. Say ; and I confess that he has not refuted you, with his hab- itual sagacity. I, for my part, cannot consent to give up to you the domain of facts ; fot while on your side you can advance only limited and special facts, we can oppose to them universal facts, the free and volun- tary acts of all men. What do we maintain ? and what do you main- lain? We maintain that " it is best to buy from others what we ourselves can produce only at a higher price." You maintain that " it is best to make for our- selves, even though it should cost us more than to buy from others." Now gentlemen, putting aside theory, demonstra- tion, reasoning, (things which seem to nauseate you,) which of these assertions is sanctioned by universal practice ? Visit our fields, workshops, forges, stores ; look above, below, and around you ; examine what is passing in your own household ; observe your own actions at every moment, and say which principle it is, that directs these laborers, workmen, contrac- tors, and merchants ; say what is your own personal jsracftce. THEORY— PRACTICE. 107 Does the agriculturist make his own clothes? Does the tailor produce the grain which he con- sumes ? Does not your housekeeper cease to make her bread at home, as soon as she finds it more economical to buy it from the baker ? Do you lay down your pen to take up the blacking-brush in order to avoid paying tribute to the shoe-black ? Does not the whole economy of society depend upon a separation of occupations, a division of labor, in a word, upon mutual exchange of produc- tion, by which we, one and all, make a calculation which causes us to discontinue direct production, when indirect acquisition offers us a saving of time and labor. . You are not then sustained by practice, since it would be impossible, were you to search the world, to show lis a single man who acts according to your principle. You may answer that you never intended to make your principle the rule of individual relations. You confess that it would thus destroy all social ties, and force men to the isolated life of snails. You only contend that it governs in fact, the relations which are established between the agglomerations of the human family. We say that this assertion too is erroneous. A family, a town, county, department, province, all are so many agglomerations, which, without any exception, aW. practically xe]Qr*iy. For, in France, the land of liberty, those who dcT'ire to form associations must renounce political Quscussions — that is to say, the discussion of their cc-tnmon interests. However, after much hesitation, hr m^•de the question the order of the day. The assembly was divided into as many sub-com- mittees as there wen different trades represented. A blank was handed to each sub-committee, which, after fifteen days' discussion, t^sls to be filled and returned. On the appointed day the vererable President took the chair (of&cial style, for it was oLly a stool) and found upon the table (of&cial style, again, for it was a deal plank across a barrel) a dopen r -sports, which he read in succession. The first presented was that of the tailors. Eevf it is, as accurately as if it had been photographed : HESULTS OF PBOTECTION EEPORT OF THE TAILORS. Disadtantagee, AdvantagtB, 1. On account of the protective tariff, we pay more None, for onr own bread, meat, sugar, thread, etc., which is -^_ -^^ \ii.^re ex- eqniralent to a considerable diminntion of onr wages. 2. On acconnt of the protective tariff, onr patrons are also obliged to pay more for everything, and have less to spend for clothes, consequently wo have less work and Fmaller profits. 3. On acconnt of the protective tariff, clothes are ex- pensive, and peopie make them wear longer, which results in a loss of work, and compels us to offer our services at greatly reduced rates. amined the ques- tion in every light, and have been unable to perceive a single point in regard to which the pro- tective System il advantageous to onr trade. 208 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. Here is another report : EFFECTS OF PROTECTION REPOBT OF TUE BLACKSMITHt, Disadvantaget. Adv^intaffsa. 1. The protective fiystQm Imposes ft tax (which does not get into the Treasury) every time we eat, drinlE, warm, or clothe ourselves. 2. It imposes a similar tax upon nur neighbors, and hence, having less money, most of them use wooden pegs. Instead of buying nails, which deprives us of labor. 8. It keeps the price of Iron so high that it can no None, longer be used In the country for plows, or gates, or house fixtures, and our trade, which might give work to BO many who have none, docs not even give ourselves enough to do. 4. The deficit occasioned In the Treasury by those goods icJbich do not enter is made up by taxes on cnr salt The other reports, with which I will not trouble the reader, told the same story. Gardeners, carpen- ters, shoemakei-s, boatmen, all complained of the same grievances. I am sorry there were no day laborers in our asso- ciation. Their report would certainly have been exceedingly instructive. But, unfortunately, the poor laborers of our province, all protected as they are, have not a cent, and, after having taken care of their cattle, cannot go themselves to the Mutual Aid Society. The pretended favora of protection do not prevent them from being the pariahs of modern society. What I would especially remark is the good sense with which our villagers have perceived not only the direct evil results of protection, but also DEARNESS — CHEAPNESS. 209 the indirect evil which, affecting their patrons, reacts upon themselves. This is a fact, it seems to me, which the econo- mists of the school of the Moniteur Industriel do not understand. And possibly some men, who are fascinated by a very little protection, the agriculturists, for instance, would voluntarily renounce it if they noticed this side of the question. Possibly, they might say to themselves: " It is better to support one's self sur- rounded by well-to-do neighbors, than to be pro- tected in the miast of poverty." For to seek to encourage every branch of industry by successively creating a void around them, is as vain as to attempt to jump away from one's shadow. DEARNESS — CHEAPNESS. I CONSIDER it my duty to say a few words in regard to the delusion caused by the words dear and cheap. At the first glance, I am aware, you may be disposed to find these remarks somewhat subtile, but whether subtile or not, the question is whether they are true. 'Eox my part I consider 18 210 SOl'HISMS OF PKOTEClTO^r. them perfectly true, and particularly well adapted to cause reflection among a large number of those who cherish a sincere faith in the efBcacy of pro- tection. Whether advocates of free trade or defenders of protection, we are all obliged to make use of the expression dearness and cheapness. The former take sides in behalf of cheapness, having in view the interests of consumers. The latter pronounce themselves in favor of dearness, preoccupying them- selves solely with the interests of the producer. Others intervene, saying, producer and consumer are one and the same, which leaves wholly undecided the qrfestion whether cheapness or dearness ought to be the object of legislation. In this conflict of opinion it seems to me that there is only one position for the law to take — to allow prices to regulate themselves naturally. But the principle of " let alone " has obstinate enemies. They insist upon legislation without even knowing the desired objects of legislation. It would seem, however, to be the duty of those who wish to create high or low prices artificially, to state, and to sub- stantiate, the reasons of their preference. The bur- den of proof is upon them. Liberty is always considered beneficial until the contrary is proved, and to allow prices naturally to regulate themselves is liberty. But the roles have been changed. The partisans of high prices have obtained a triumph DEAENESS — CHEAPNESS. 211 for their system, and it has fallen to defenders of natural prices to prove the advantages of their sys- tem. The argument on both sides is conducted with two words. It is very essential, then, to under- stand their meaning. It must be granted at the outset that a series of events have happened well calculated to disconcert both sides. In order to produce high prices the protectionists have obtained high tariffs, and still low prices have come to disappoint their expectations. In order to produce low prices, free traders have sometimes carried their point, and, to their great astonishment, the result in some instances has been an increase instead of a reduction in prices. For instance, in France, to protect farmers, a law was passed imposing a duty of twenty-two per cent upon imported wools, and the result has been that native wools have been sold for much lower prices than before the passage of the law. In England a law in behalf of the consuihers was passed, exempting foreign wools from duty, and the consequence has been that native wools have sold higher than ever before. And this is not an isolated fact, for the price of wool has no special or peculiar nature which takes it out of the general law governing prices. The same fact has been reproduced under analogous cir- cumstances. Contrary to all expectation, protection 212 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTIOK. has frequently resulted in low prices, ana free trade in high prices. Hence there has been a deal of perplexity in the discussion, the protectionists say- ing to their adversaries : " These low prices that you talk about so much are the result of our sys- tem ; " and the free traders replying : " Those high prices which you find so profitable are the conse- quence of free trade." There evidently is a misunderstanding, an illu- sion, which must be dispelled. This I will endeavor to do. Suppose two isolated nations, each composed of a million inhabitants ; admit that, other things being equal, one nation had exactly twice as much of everything as the other — twice as much wheat, wine, iron, fuel, books, clothing, furniture, etc. It will be conceded that one will have twice as much wealth as the other. There is, however, no reason for the statement that the absolute prices are diflferent in the two nations. They possibly may be higher in the wealthiest nation. It may happen that in the United States everything is nominally dearer than in Poland, and that, nevertheless, the people there are less generally supplied with everything ; by which it may be seen that the abundance of pro- ducts, and not the absolute price, constitutes wealth. In order, then, accurately to compare free trade and protection the inquiry should not be which of the DEAEN;ESS — CHEAPNESS. 213 two causes high prices or low prices, but which of the two produces abundance or scarcity. For observe this : Products are exchanged, the one for the other, and a relative scarcity and a rela- tive abundance leave the absolute price exactly at the same point, but not so the condition of men. Let us look into the subject a little further. Since the increase and the reduction of duties have been accompanied by results so different from what had been expected, a fall of prices frequently succeeding the increase of the tariff, and a rise some- times following a reduction of duties, it has become necessary for political economy to attempt the ex- planation of a phenomenon which so overthrows received ideas ; for, whatever may be said, science is simply a faithful exposition and a true explana- tion of facts. This phenomenon may be easily explained by one circumstance which should never be lost sight of. It is that there are two causes for high prices, and not one merely. The same is t:ue of low prices. One of the best established principles of political economy is that price is determined by the. law of supply and demand. The price is then affected by two conditions^ the demand and the supply. These conditions are cecessarily subject to variation. The relations of , 214 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECnON. demand to supply may be exactly countei oalanced, or may be greatly disproportionate, and the varia- tions of price are almost interminable. Prices rise either on account of augmented demand or diminished supply. They fall by reason of an augmentation of the supply or a diminution of the demand. Consequently there are two kinds of dearness and two kinds of cheapness. There is a bad dear- ness, which results from a diminution of the sup- ply ; for this implies scarcity and privation. There is a good dearness — that which results from an increase of demand ; for this indicates the aug- mentation of the general wealth. There is also a good cheapness, resulting from abundance. And there is a baneful cheapness — such as results ft-om the cessation of demand, the inability of consumers to purchase. And observe this : Prohibition causes at the same time both the dearness and the cheapness which are of a bad nature ; a bad dearness, resulting from a diminution of the supply (this indeed is its avowed object), and a bad cheapness, resulting from a diminution of the demand, because it gives a false direction to capital and labor, and overwhelms consumers with taxes and restrictions. So that, as regards the price, these two tendencies neutralize each other ; and for this reason, the pro- tective system, restricting the supply and the de- DEAENESS — CHEAPNESS. 215 maud at tlie same time, does not realize the high prices which are its object. ' But with respect to the condition 'oi the people, these two tendencies do not neutralize each other ; on the contrary, they unite in impoverishing them. The effect of free trade is exactly the opposite. Possibly it does not cause the cheapness which it ' promises ; for it also has two tendencies, the one towards that desirable form of cheapness resulting from the increase of supply, or from abundance ; the other towards that dearness consequent upon the increased demand and the development of the general wealth. These two tendencies neutralize themselves as regards the m.ere price; but they con- cur in their tendency to ameliorate the condition of mankind. In a word, under the protective system men recede towards a condition of feebleness as regards both supply and demand ; under the free- trade system, they advance towards a condition where development is gradual without any necessary increase in the absolute prices of things. Price is not a good criterion of wealth. It might continue the same when society had relapsed into the most abject misery, or had advanced to a high state of prosperity. Let me make application of this doctrine in a few words : A farmer in the south of France supposes himself as rich as Croesus, because he is protected by law from foreign competition. He is as poor as 216 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. Job — no matter, he will none the less suppose that this protection will sooner or later make him rich. Under these cifcumstances, if the question was pro- pounded to him, as it was by the committee of the Legislature, in these terms : " Do you want to be subject to foreign competition ? yes or no," his first answer would be "No," and the committee would record his reply with great enthusiasm. We should go, however, to the bottom of things. Doubtless foreign competition, and competition of any kind, is always inopportune ; and, if any trade could be permanently rid of it, business, for a time, would be prosperous. But protection is not an isolated favor. It is a system. If, in order to protect the farmer, it occa- sions a scarcity of wheat and of beef, in behalf of other industries it produces a scarcity of iron, cloth, fuel, tools, etc. — in short, a scarcity of everything. If, then, the scarcity of wheat has a tendency to increase the price by reason of the diminution of the supply, the scarcity of all other products for which wheat is exchanged has likewise a tendency to depreciate the value of wheat on account of a falling off of the demand ; so that it is by no means certain that wheat will be a mill dearer under a protective tariff than under a system of free trade. This alone is certain, that inasmuch as there is a smaller amount of everything in the country, each individual will be more poorly provided with everything. DBAENESS— CHEAPNESS. 217 Tbe farmer would do well to consider whether it would not be more desirable for him to allow the importation of wheat and beef, and, as a conse- quence, to be surrounded by a well-to-do com- munity, able to consume and to pay for every agri- cultural product. There is a certain province where the mtn are covered with rags, dwell in hovels, and subsist on chestnuts. How can agriculture flourish there? "What can they make the earth produce, with the expectation of profit? Meat? They eat none. Milk ? They drink only the water of springs. But- ter? It is an article of luxury far beyond them. Wool ? They get along without it as much as possible. Can any one imagine that all these objects of consumption can be thus left untouched by the masses, without lowering prices? That which we say of a farmer, we can say of a manufacturer. Cloth-makers assert that foreiga competition will lower prices owing to the increased quantity offered. Very well, but are not these prices raised by the increase of the demand ? Is the consumption of cloth a fixed and invariable quan- tity ? Is each one as well provided with it as he might and should be ? And if the general wealth were developed by the abolition of all these taxes and hindrances, would not the first use made of it by the population be to clothe themselves better? Therefore the question, the eternal question, is 20 218 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. not whether protection favors this or that special branch of industry, but whether, all things con- sidered, restriction is, in its nature, more profitable than freedom? Now, no person can maintain that proposition. And just this explains the admission which our opponents continually make to us : " You are right on principle." If that is true, if restriction aids each special industry only through a greater injury to the gen- eral prosperity, let us understand, then, that the price itself, considering that alone, expresses a relation between each special industry and the general indus- try, between the supply and the demand, and that, reasoning from these premises, this remunerative price (the object of protection) is more hindered than favored by it APPENDIX. We published an article entitled Deamess- Cheap- ness, which gained for us the two following lettei-s. We publish them, with the answers : "Dear Mr. Editor: — Tou upset all my ideas. I preached in favor of free trade, and found it very convenient to put prom- inently forward the idea of cheapness. I went everywhere, saying, " With free trade, bread, meat, woolens, linen, iron and coal will fall in price." This displeased those who sold, but delighted those who bought. Now, you raise a doubt as to wiiether cheapness is the result of free trade. But if not, of what use is it? What will the people gain, if foreign competition, DEARNESS — CHEAPNESS. 219 ■which may interfere with them in their sales, does not favor them in their purchases?" My Dear Free Trader: — Allow us to say that you have but half read the article which pro- voked your letter. We said that free trade acted precisely like roads, canals and railways, like every- thing which facilitates communications, and like everything which destroys obstacles. Its firat ten- dency is to increase the quantity of the article which is relieved from duties, and consequently to lower its p'ice. But by increasing, at the same time, the quantity of all the things for which this article is exchanged, it increases the demand, and conse- quently the price rises. You ask us what the peo- ple will gain. Suppose they have a balance with certain scales, in each one of which they, have for their use a certain quantity of the articles which you have enumerated. If a little grain is put in one scale it will gradually sink, but if- an equal quan- tity of cloth, iron and coal is added in the others, the equilibrium will be maintained. Looking at the beam above, there will be no change. Looking at the people, we shall see them better fed, clothed and warmed. " Dear Mr. Editor : — I am a cIoth.manufacturer, and a protec- tionist. I confess that your article on clearness and cheapness has led me to reflect. It has something specious about it, and it weU proven, would work my conversion." 220 SOPHISMS OF PROTfiCTION. My Deab Protectionist : — We say tbat the end and aim of your restrictive measures is a wrong- ful one — artificial clearness. But we do not say that they always realize the hopes of those who initiate them. It is certain that they inflict on the consumer all the evils of dearnesa. It is not certain that the producer gets the profit Why ? Because if they diminish the supply they also diminish the demand. This proves that in the economical arrangement of this world there is a moral force, a vis medicatrix, which in the long run causes inordinate ambition to become the prey of a delusion. Pray, notice, sir, that one of the elements of the prosperity of each special branch of industry is the general prosperity. The rent of a house is not merely in proportion to what it has cost, but also to the number and means of the tenants. Do two houses which are precisely alike necessarily rent for the same sum ? Certainly not, if one is in Paris and the other in Lower Brittany. Let us never speak of a price without regarding the conditions, and let us understand that there is nothing more futile than to try to build the prosperity of the parts on the ruin of the whole. This is the attempt of the restrictive system. Competition always has been, and always will be, disagreeable to those who ai-e affected by it. Thua we see that in all times and in all places men t.7 to get rid of it We know, and you too, perhaps, a DEARNESS— CHEAPNESS. 221 municipal council where the resident merchants make a furious war on the foreign ones. Their pro- jectiles are import duties, fines, etc., etc. ISTow, just think what would have become of Paris, for instance, if this war had been carried on there with success. Suppose that the first shoemaker who settled there had succeeded in keeping out all others, and that the first tailor, the first mason, the first printer, the first watchmaker, the first hair-dresser, the first physician, the first baker, had been equally fortunate. Paris would still be a village, with twelve or fifteen hundred inhabitants. But it was not thus. Each one, except those whom you still keep away, came to make money in this market, and that is precisely what has built it up. It has been a long series of collisions for the enemies of competition, and from one collision after another, Paris has become a city of a million inhabitants. The general prosperity has gained by this, doubtless, but have the shoemakers and tailors, individually, lost anything by it? For you, this is the question. As competitors came, you said : The price of boots will fail. Has it been so ? No, for if the supply has increased, the demand has increased also. Thus will it be with cloth ; therefore let it come in. It is true that you will have more competitors, but you will also have more customers, and richer onea Did you never think of this when seeing 222 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECTION. nine-tenths of your countrymen deprived during the winter of that superior cloth that you make? This is not a very long lesson to learn. If you •wish to prosper, let your customers do the same. When this is once known, each one will seek his welfare in the general welfare. Then, jealousies between individuals, cities, provinces and nations, will no longer vex the world. VI. TO ARTISANS AND LABORERS. Many papers have attacked me before you- Will you not read my defense ? I am not mistrustful. When a man writes or speaks, I believe that he thinks what he says. What is the. question? To ascertain which is the more advantageous for you, restriction or liberty. I believe that it is liberty; they believe it is restriction ; it is for each one to prove his case. Was it necessary to insinuate that we are the agents of England ? You will see how easy recrimination would be on this ground. We are, they say, agents of the English, because TO ARTISANS AND LABORERS. 223 some of us have used the English words meeting, free trader! And do not they use the English words drawback and budget? We imitate Cobden and the English democracy I Do not they parody Bentinck and the British aristocracy ? We borrow from perfidious Albion the doctrine of liberty. Do not they borrow from her the sophisms of protection ? We follow the commercial impulse of Bordeaux £tnd the South. Do not they serve the greed of Lille, and the manufacturing North ? We favor the secret designs of the ministry, which desires to turn public attention away from the protective policy. Do not they favor the views of the Custom House officers, who gain more than anybody else by this protective regime? So you see that if we did not ignore this war of epithets, we should not be without weapons. But that is not the point in issue. The c[uestion which I shall not lose sight of is this: Which is better for the working-classes, to be free or not to be free to purchase from, abroad? Workmen, they say to you, " If you are free to 224 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION'. buy from abroad tbese things which you now make yourselves, you will no longer make them. You ■will be without work, without wage,s and without bread. It is then for your own good that your lib- erty be restricted." This objection recurs iii all forms. They say, for instance, " If we clothe ourselves with English cloth, if we make our plowshares with English iron, if we cut our bread with English knives, if we wipe our hands with English napkins, what will become of the French workmen — what will become of the national labor f^ Tell me, workmen, if a man stood on the pier at Boulogne, and said to every Englishman who landed : If you will give me those English boots, I will give you this French hat ; or, if you will let me have this English horse, I will let you have this French carriage ; or. Are you willing to exchange this Birmingham machine for this Paris clock ? or, again. Does it suit you to barter your Newcastle coal for this Champagne wine ? I ask you whether, supposing this man makes his proposals with average judgment, it can be said that our national labor, taken as a whole, would be harmed by it ? Would it be more so if there were twenty of these jpeople offering to exchange services at Bou- ■ logne instead of one ; if a million barters were made instead of faur; and if the intervention of mer- : chants and money was called on to facilitate them and multiply them ipdefinitely? TO ARTISANS AND LABORERS. 225 Now, let one country buy of another at wholesale to sell again at retail, or at retail to sell again at wholesale, it will always be found, if the matter is followed out to the end, that commerce consists of mutual barter of products for products, of services foi- services. If, then, one barter does not injure th6 national labor, since it implies as much national labor given as foreign labor received, a hundred million of them cannot hurt the country. But, you will say, where is the advantage ? The advantage consists in making a better use of the resources of each country, so that the same amount of labor gives more satisfaction and well-being everywhere. There are some who employ singular tactics against you. They begin by admitting the supe- riority of freedom over the prohibitive system, doubtless in order that they may not have to defend themselves on that ground. Next they remark that in going from one system to another there will be some displacement of labor. Then thoy dilate upon the sufferings which, according to themselves, this displacement must cause. They exaggerate and amplify them ; they make of them the principal subject of discussion ; tney present them as the exclusive and definite result of reform, and thus try to enlist you under the standard of monopoly. These tactics have been employed in the service 21 226 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. of all abuses, and I must frankly admit one thing, that it always embarrasses even the friends of those reforms which are most useful to the people. You will understand why. When an abuse exists, everything arranges iteelf upon it. Human existences connect themselves with it, others with these, then still others, and this forms a great edifice. Do you raise your hand against it ? Each one protests ; and notice this particularly, those persons who protest always seem at the first glance to be right, because it is easier to show the disorder which must accompany the reform than the order which will follow it The friends of the abuse cite particular instances ; they name the persons and their workmen who will be disturbed, while the poor devil of a reformer can only refer to the general good, which must in- sensibly diffuse itself among the masses. This does not have the effect which the other has. Thus, supposing it is a question of abolishing slavery. " Unhappy people," they say to the col- ored men, " who will feed you ? The master dis- tributes floggings, but he also distributes rations." It is not seen that it is not the master who feeds the slave, but his own labor which feeds both him- self and master. When the convents of Spain were reformed, they TO ARTISANS AND LABOKEES. 227 said to the beggars, " Where will you find broth and clothing ? The Abbot is your providence. Is it not very convenient to apply to him ? " And the beggars said : " That is true. If the Abbot goes, we see what we lose, but we do not see what will come in its place." They do not notice that if the convents gave alms they lived on alms, so that the people had to give them more than they could receive back. Thus, workmen, a rnonopoly imperceptibly puts taxes on your shoulders, and then furnishes you work with the proceeds. Your false friends say to you : If there was no monopoly, who would furnish you work ? You answer : This is true, this is true. The labor which the monopolists procure us is certain. The promises of liberty are uncertain. For you do not see that they first take money from you, and then give you back a part of it for your labor. Do you ask who will furnish you work ? Why, you will give each other work. With the money which will no longer be taken from you, the shoe- maker will dress better, and will make work for the tailor. The tailor will have new shoes oftener, and keep the shoemaker employed. So it wJ.U be with all occupations. They say that with freedom there will •-«■ f^^'vg" workmen in the mines and the mills. 228 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECTION. 1 do not believe it But if this does happen, it is necessarily because there will be more labor freely in the open aii'. For if, as they say, these mines and spinning mills can be sustained only by the aid of taxes imposed on everybody for their benefit, these taxes once abolished, everybody will be more comfortably off, and it is the comfort of all which feeds the labor of each one. Excuse me if I linger at this demonstration. I have so great a desire to see you on the side of liberty. In France, capital invested in manufactures yields, I suppose, five per cent profit But here is Mon- dor, who has one hundred thousand francs invested in a manufactory, on which he loses five per cent The difference between the loss and gain i.s ten thousand francs. What do they do ? They assess upon you a little tax of ten thousand francs, which is given to Mondor, and you do not notice it, for it is very skillfully disguised. It is not the tax gath- erer who comes to ask you your part of the tax, but you p'i/ it to Mondor, the manufacturer, every time you buy your hatchets, your trowels, and your plan — Do you believe that two would be too much for your share of the array and navy expenses ? — ^Alas, it is little compared with what they have cost me already. They have taken from me two sons whom I tenderly loved. — The balance of power in Europe must be maintained. — Well, my God I the balance of power would be the same if these forces were everywhere reduced a half or three-quarters. We should save our children and our money All that is needed is to understand it 256 SOPHISMS OP PROTECTIOK. — Yes, but they do not understand it — That is what amazes me. For every one Buf. fers from it. — You wished it so, Jacques Bonhomme. — You are jesting, my dear Mr. Collector ; have I a vote in the legislative halls ? — Whom did you support for Deputy ? — An excellent General, who will be a Marshal presently, if God spares his life. — On what does this excellent General live ? — My hogsheads, I presume. — And what would happen were he to vote for a reduction of the army and your military establifih- ment ? — Instead of being made a Marshal, he would be retired. — ^Do you now understand that yourself ? — Let us pass to the fifth hogshead, I beg of you. — ^That goes to Algeria. — To Algeria 1 And they tell me that all Mus- sulmans are temperance people, the barbarians I What services will they give me in exchange for this ambrosia, which has cost me so much labor ? — ^None at all ; it is not intended for Mussulmans, but for good Christians who spend their days in Barbary. — What can they do there which will be of ser- vice to me ? — Undertake and undergo raids; kill and bo THE TAX COLLECTOE. 257 killed ; get dysenteries and come home to be doc- tored ; dig harbors, make roads, build villages and' people them with Maltese, Italians, Spaniards and Swiss, who live on your hogshead, and many others which I shall come in the future to ask of you. — Mercy ! This is too much, and I flatly refuse you my hogshead. They wo aid send a wine- grower who did such foolish acts to the mad-house. Make roads in the Atlas Mountains, when I cannot get out of my own house ! Dig ports in Barbary when the Garonne fills up with sand every day ! Ta,ke from me my children whom I love, in order to torment Arabs ! Make me pay for the houses, grain and horses, given to the Greeks and Maltese, when there are so many poor around us ! — The poor ! Exactly ; they free the country of this superfluity. — Oh, yes, by sending after them to Algeria the money which would enable them to live here. — But then you lay the basis of a great empire, you carry civilization into Africa, and you crown your country with immortal glory. — You are a poet, my dear Collector ; but I am a vine-grower, and I refuse. — Think that in a few thousand years you will get back your advances a hundred fold. All those who have charge of the enterprise say so. — At first they asked me for one barrel of wine 258 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECnON. to meet expenses, tTien two, then three, and now I am taxed a hogshead. I persist in my refusf^L — ^It is too late. Your representative has agreed that you shall give a hogshead. — That is but too true. Cursed weakness ! It seems to me that I was unwise in making him my agent ; for what is there in common between the General of an army and the poor owner of a vine- yard? ' — You see well that there is something in com- mon between you, were it only the wine you make^ and which, in your name, he votes to himself — ^Laugh at me ; I deserve it, my dear Collector. But be reasonable, and leave me the sixth hogshead at least The interest of the debt is paid, the civil list provided for, the public service assured, and the war in Africa perpetuated. What more do you want ? — The bargain is not made with m& You must tell your desires to the General. He has disposed of your vintage. — But what do you propose to do with this poor .hogshead, the flower of my flock ? Come, taste this wine. How mellow, delicate, velvety it is I — Excellent, delicious ! It will suit D , the cloth manufacturer, admirably. — D , the manufacturer ! What do you mean ? — That he will make a good bargain out of it — How ? What is that ? I do not understand you. THE TAX COLLECTOR. 259 — ^Do you not know that D has started a ina;gnificent establishment very useful to the coun- try, but which loses much money every year ? — I am very sorry. But what can I do to help him? — The Legislature saw that if things went on thus, D would either have to do a better busi- ness or close his manufactory. — ^But what connection is there between D 'a bad speculations and my hogshead ? — The Chamber thought that if it gave D a little wine from your cellar, a few bushels of grain taken from your neighbors, and a few pennies cut from the wages of the workingmen, his losses would change into profits. — This recipe is as infallible as it is ingenious. But it is shockingly unjust. What! is D to cover his losses by taking my wine ? — ^Not exactly the wine, but the proceeds of it. That is what we call a hounty for encouragement. But you look amazed I Do not you see what a great service you render to the country ? -^You mean to say to D ? — To the country. D asserts that, thanks to this arrangement, his business prospers, and thus it is, says he, that the country grows rich. That is what he recently said in the Chamber of which he is a member. — It is a damnable fraud ! What I A fool gf)es 260 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. into a silly enterprise, he spends his money, and if he extorts from me wine or grain enough to make good his losses, and even to make him a profit, he calls it a general gain ! — Your representative having come to that conclu- sion, all you have to do is to give me the six hogs- heads of wine, and sell the fourteen that I leave you for as much as possible. — That is my business. — For, you see, it would be very annoying if you ^ did not get a good price for them — I will think of it — For there are many things which the money you receive must procure. — I know it, sir. I know it — In the first place, if you buy iron to renew your spades and plowshares, a law declares that you must pay the iron-master twice what it was worth. — Ah, yes ; does not the same thing happen in the Black Forest ? — Then, if you need oil, meat, cloth, coal, wool and sugar, each one by the law will cost you twice what it is worth. — But this is horrible, frightful, abominable. — "What is the use of these hard words? You yourself, through your authorized agent — Leave me alone with my authorized agent I made a very strange disposition of my vote, it- is UTOPIAN IDEA& 261 true. But they shall deceive me no more, and I will be represented by some good and honest countryman. — Bah, you will re-elect the worthy General. — I? I re-elect the General to give away my wine to Africans and manufacturers ? — You will re-elect him, I say. — That is a little too much. I will not re-elect him, if I do not want to. — But you will want to, and you will re-elect him. — Let him come here and try. He will see who he will have to settle with. — We shall see. Good bye. I take away your six hogsheads, and will proceed to divide them as -the General has directed. XI. UTOPIAN IDEAS. If I were His Majesty's Minister ! — Well,' what would you do ? — I should begin by — by — upon my word, by being very much embarrassed. For I should be Minister only because I had the majority, and I should have that only because I had made it, and I 262 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. could only have made it, honestly at least, by gov- erning according to its ideas. So if I undertake to carry out my ideas and to run counter to its ideas, I shall not have the majority, and if I do not, I cannot be His Majesty's Minister. — Just imagine that you are so, and that conse- quently the majority is not opposed to you, what would you do ? — I would look to see on which side justice is. — And then ? — I would seek to find where utility was. — What next ? — I would see whether they agreed, or were in conflict with one another. — And if you found they did not agree ? — I would say to the King, take back your port- folio. —But suppose you see that justice and utilAty are one ? — Then I will gc straight ahead. — Very well, but to realize utility by justice, a third thing is necessary. —What is that ? — Possibility. — ^You conceded that —When? — Just now — How ? —By -giving me the majority. UTOPIAN IDEAS. . 263 — It seems to me that the concession was ravner hazardous, for it implies that the majority clearly sees what is just, clearly sees what is useful, and clearly sees • that these things are in perfect accord. — And if it sees this clearly, the good will, so to speak, do itself — This is the point to which you are constantly bringing me — to see a possibility of reform only in the progress of the general intelligence. — By this progress all reform is infallible. — Certainly. But this preliminary progress takes time. Let us suppose it accomplished. What will you do ? for I am eager to see you at work, doing, practicing. — I should begin by reducing letter postage to ten centimes. — I heard you speak of five, once. — Yes ; but as I have other reforms in view, I must move with prudence, to avoid a deficit in the revenues. — Prudence ? This leaves you with a deficit of thirty millions. — Then I will reduce the salt tax to ten francs. — Good ! Here is another deficit ■ of thirty mil- lions. Doubtless you have invented some new tax. — ^eaven forbid ! Besides, I do not flatter myself that I have an inventive mind. — ^It is necessary, however. Oh, I have it What 264 SOPHISMS OF I'ROTECTIOX. was I thinking of? You are simply going to diminisii the expense. I did not think of that — You are not the only one. I shall come to that ; but I do not count on it at present — What I you diminish the receipts, witbeat les- sening expenses, and you avoid a deficit? — Yes, by diminishing other taxes at the same time. (Here the interlocutor, putting the index finger of his right hand on his forehead, shook his head, which may be translated thus : He is rambling terribly.) Well, upon my word, this is ingenious. I pay the Treasury a hundred francs ; yoa. relieve me of five francs on salt, five on postage ; and in order that the Treasury may nevertheless receive one hundred francs, you relieve me of ten on some other tax ? • — Precisely ; you understand me. — How can it be true ? I am not even sure that I have heard you. — I repeat that I balance one remission of taxes by another. — ^I have a little time to give, and I should like to hear you expound this paradox. — Here is the whole mystery: I know a tax which costs you twenty francs, not a sou of which gets to the Treasury. I relieve you of half of it, and make the other half take its proper destinatioa UTOPIAN IDEAS. 265 — ^You are an unequaled flnamuer. There is but one difficulty. Wliat tax, if you please, do I pay, which does not go to the Treasury ? — How much does this suit of clothes cost you ? — A hundred francs. — How much would it have cost you if you had gotten the cloth from Belgium ? — Eighty francs. — Then wiy did jou not get it there ? — Because it is proKibited. —Why? — So that the suit may cost me one hundred francs instead of eighty. — This denial, then, costs you twenty francs ? — Undoubtedly. — And where do these twenty francs go ? — Where do they go ? To the manufacturer of the cloth. — Well, give me ten francs for the Treasury, and I will remove the restriction, and you will gain ten francs. — Oh, I begin to see. The treasury account shows that it loses five francs on postage and five on salt, and gains ten on cloth. That is even. — ^Your account is — you gain five francs on salt, five on postage, and ten on cloth. — Total, twenty francs. This is satisfactory enough. But what becomes of the poor cloth man- ufacturer ? 24 266 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. — Oh, I have thought of him. I have secured compensation for him by means of the tax reduc- tions which are so profitable to the Treasury. What I have done for you as regards cloth, I do for him in regard to wool, coal, machinery, etc., so that he can lower his price without loss. — But are you sure that will be an equivalent? — The balance will be in his favor. The twenty francs that you gain on the cloth will be multiplied by those which I will saye for you on grain, meat, fuel, etc. This will amount to a large sum, and each one of your 35,000,000 fellow-citizens will save the same way. There will be enough to con- sume the cloths of both Belgium and France The nation will be better clothed ; that is all. — I will think on this, for it is somewhat con- fused in my head. — After all, as far as clothes go, the main thing is to be clothed. Your limbs are your own, and not the manufacturer's. To shield them from cold is your business and not his. If the law takes sides for him against you, the law is unjust, and you allowed me to reason on the hypothesis that what is unjust is hurtful. — Perhaps I admitted too much ; but go on and explain your financial plan. — Then I will make a tarifiE — In two folio volumes ? — No, in two sections. UTOPIAN IDEAS. 267 — Then they will no longer say that this famous axiom " No one is supposed to be ignorant of the law " is a fiction. Let us see your tariff. — Here it is : Section First. All imports shall pay an ad valorem tax of five per cent. — Even raw materials f — Unless they are xoorthless. — But they all have value, much or little. — Then they will pay much or little. — How can our manufactories compete with foreign ones which have these raw materials free ? — The expenses of the State being certain, if we close this source of revenue, we must open another ; this will not diminish the relative inferiority of our manufactories, and thera will be one bureau more to organize and pay. — That is true ; I reasoned as if the tax was to be annulled, not changed. I will reflect on this. What is your second section ? — Section Second. All exports shall pay an ad valorem tax of five per cent. — Merciful Heavens, Mr. Utopist ! You will certainly be stoned, and, if it .comes to that, I will throw the first one. — We agreed that the majority were enlightened. — Enlightened ! Can you claim that an export duty is' not onerous ? — All taxes are onerous, but this is less so than Others. 268 SOPHISMS OF PBOTECTION. — The carnival justifies many eccentricities. Be so kind as to make tlais new paradox appear specious, if you can. —How much did you pay for this wine ? — A franc per quart. ■ — How much would you have paid outside the city gates? - — Fifty centimes. — Why this difference ? — Ask the octroi* which added ten sous to it — Who established the octroi f — The municipality of Paris, in order to pave and light the streets. — This is, then, an import duty. But if the neigh- boring country districts had established this octroi for their profit, what would happen ? — I should none the less pay a franc for wine worth only-fifty centimes, and the other fifty cen- times would pave and light Montmartre and the Batignolles. ^So that really it is the consumer who pays the tax? — There is no doubt of that. — Then by taxing exports you make foreigners help pay your expenses, f ♦ The eatrancQ duty leyiod at the gates of French towns. t I, understand M. Basttat to mean merely" that export dntics are nAt neoessarlly more onerous than import duttea. The statement that all taxes are paid hy the consumer, Is liable to important modifications. An export duty may bo laid in such ^ay, and on such articles, that It will 1>« patil UTOPIAN IDEAS. 2(j9 — I find you at fau.t, this is not justice. — Why not ? In order to secure the production of anj'- one thing, there must be instruction, security, roads, and other costly things in the country. Why shall not the foreigner who is to consume this pro- duct, bear the charges its production necessitates? — This is contrary to received ideas. ■ — Not the least in the world. The last purchaser must repay all the direct and indirect expenses of production. • — No matter what you say, it is plain that such a measure would paralyze commerce, and cut off all exports. — That is an illusion. If you were to pay this tax besides all the others, you would be right. Bnt, if the hundred millions raised in this way, relieve you of other taxes to the same amount, you go into foreign markets with all your advantages, and even with more, if this duty has occasioned less embarrassment and expense. - — I will reflect on this. So now the salt, postage and customs are regulated. Is all ended there ? — ^I am just beginning. — Pray, fnitiate me in your Utopian ideas. — I have lost sixty millions on salt and postage. I shall regain them through the customs ; which also gives me something more precious. ■wholly by the foreign yrasumcr, withont loss to the producing country, but It is only when tho additional cost does not lessen the demand, or induco the foreigner to produce the same article. TrapslatoT. 270 Sophisms of pkotection. — What, pray? — International relations founded on justice, and a probability of peace which is equivalent to a cer- tainty. I will disband the army. —The whole army ? — Except special branches, which will be volun- tarily recruited, like all other professions. You see, conscription is abolished. — Sir, you should say recruiting. — Ah, I forgot, I cannot help admiring the ease with which, in certain countries, the most unpopu- lar things are perpetuated by giving them other names. — Like consolidated duties, which have become indirect contributions. — And the gendarmes, who have taken the name of municipal guards. — In short, trusting to Utopia, you disarm the country. — I said that I would muster out the army, not that I would disarm the country. I intend, on the contrary, to give it invincible power. — How do you harmonize this mass of contradic- tions ? — I call all the citizens to service. —Is it worth while to relieve a portion from service in order to call out everybody ? —You did not make me Minister in order that I should leave things as they are. Thus, on my UTOPIAN IDEAa 271 advent to power, I shall say with Eichelieu, " the State maxims are changed." My first maxim, the one which will serve as a basis for my administra- tion, is this : Every citizen must know two tilings — How to earn his own living, and defend his country. ■ — It seems to me, at the first glance, that there is a spark of good sense in this. — Consequently, I base the national defense on a law consisting of two sections. Section First. Every able-bodied citizen, with- out exception, shall be under arms for four years, from his twenty-first to his twenty-fifth year, in order to receive military instruction. — — This is pretty -economy 1 You send home four hundred thousand soldiers and call out ten millions. — Listen to my second section : Sec. 2. Unless he proves, at the age of twenty- one, that he knows the school of the soldier perfectly. — I did not expect this turn. It is certain that to avoid four years' service, there will be a great emulation among our youth, to learn hy the right flank and double quicJc, march. The idea is odd. — It is better than that. For without grieving families and offending equality, does it not assure the country, in a simple and inexpensive manner, of ten million defenders, capable of defying a coalition of all the standing armies of the globe ? 272 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. — Truly, if I were not on my guard, I should end in getting interested in your fancies. The Utopist, geiling excited: Thank Heaven, my estimates are relieved of a hundred millions! I suppress the octroi. I r.efand indirect contributions. I— Getting more and more excited : I will proclaim religious freedom and free instruction. There shall be new resources. I will buy the railroads, pay off the public debt, and starve out the stock gamblers. — My dear Utopist ! — Freed from too numerous cares, I will concen- . trate all the resources of the government on the repression of fraud, the administration of prompt and even-handed justice. I — ^My dear Utopist, you attempt too mack The nation will not follow you. — You gave me the majority. — I take it back. — ^Very well ; then I am no longer Minister ; but my plans remain what they are — Utopian ideas. THE THREE ALDERMEN. 273 XII. SALT, POSTAGE, AND CtTSTOMS. [This chapter is an amusing dialogue relating principally to English Postal Eeform. Being inap- plicable to any condition of things existing in the United States, it is omitted. — Translator.'] XIIL the three aldermen. A DEMONSTRATION IN FODR TABLEAUX. , ^ First Tableau. [The scene is in the hotel of Alderman PieiTa The window looks out onafine'park; three per- sons are seated near a good fire.] Pierre. Upon my word, a fire is very comforj;a- ble when the stomach is satisfied. It must be agreed that it is a pleasant thing. But, alas I how many worthy people like the King of Yvetot, ' ' Blow on their fingers for want of wood.' ' Unhappy creatures, Heaven inspires nre with a charitable thought. You see these fine trees. I 35 27i SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTIOK. will cut them down and distribute the wood among the poor. Paul and Jean. What ! gratis ? Pierre. Not exactly. There would soon be an end of my good works if I scattered my property thus. I think that ray park is worth twenty thou- sand livres ; by cutting it down I shall get much more for it. Paul. A mistake. Your wood as it stands is worth more than that in the neighboring forests, for it renders services which that cannot give, When cut down it will, like that, be good for burn- ing only, anJ will not be worth a sou more per cord. Pierre. Oh I Mr. Theorist, you forget that I am a practical man. I supposed that my reputation as a speculator was well enough established to put me ibove any charge of stupidity. Do you think that I shall amuse myself by selling my wood at the price of other wood ? Paul. You must. Pierre. Simpleton ! Suppose I prevent the brmging of any wood to Paris ? Paul That will alter the case. But how will you manage it ? Piei-re. This is the whole secret You know that wood pays an entrance duty of ten sous per cord. To-morrow I will induce the Aldermen to raise this duty to one hundred, two hundi-ed, or three THE THREE ALDERMEN. 275 hundred livres, so high as to keep out every fagot. Well, do you see ? If the good people do not want to die of cold, they must come to my wood- yard. They will fight for my wood ; I shall sell it for its weight in gold, and this well-regulated deed of charity will enable me to do others of the same sort. Paul. This is a fine idea, and it suggests an equally good one to me. Jean. Well, what is it ? Paul. How do you find this Normandy butter ? Jean. Excellent. Paul. Well, it seemed passable a moment ago. But do you not think it is a little strong ? I want to make a better . article at Paris. I will have four or five hundred cows, and I will distribute milk, but- ter and cheese to the poor people. Pierre and Jean. What ! as a charity ? Paul. Bah, let us always put charity in the foreground. It is such a fine thing that its coun- ■ terfeit even is an excellent card. I will give my butter to the people and they will give me their money.' Is that called selling ? Jean. No, according to the Bourgeois Gentil- homme ; but call it what you please, you ruin your- self. Can Paris compete with Normandy in rais- ing cows ? Paul. I shall save the cost of transportation. Jean. Very well ; but the Normans are able to 276 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTIOlf. beat the Parisians, even if they do have to pay for transportation. Paul. Do you call it heating any one to furnish him things at a low price ? Jean. It is the time-honored word. You will always be beaten. Paul. Yes ; like Dpn Quixote. The blows will fall on Sancho. Jean, my friend, you forgot the octroi. Jean. The octroi!^ What has that to do with your butter? Paul. To-morrow I will demand protection, and I will induce the Council to prohibit the butter of Normandy and Brittany. The people must do without butter, or buy mine, and that at my price, too. Jean. Gentlemen, your philanthrophy carries me along with it " In time one learns to howl with the wolves." It shall not be said that I am an unworthy Alderman. Pierre, this sparkling fire Tias illumined your "soul ; Paul, this butter has given an impulse to your understanding, and I per- ceive that this piece of salt pork stimulates my intelligence. To-morrow I will vote myself, and make others vote, for the exclusion of hogs, dead or alive ; this done, I will build superb stock-yards in the middle of Paris " for the unclean animal forbidden to the Hebrews." I will become swine- herd and pork-seller, and we shall see how the THE THREE ALDEEMElsr. 277 good people of Lutetia can help getting their food at my shop. Pierre. Gently, my friends ; if you thus run up the price of butter and salt meat, you diminish the profit which I expected from my wood. Paul. Nor is my speculation so wonderful, if you ruin me with your fuel and your hams. Jean. What shall I gain by making you pay an extra price for my sausages, if you overcharge me for pastry and fagots ? Pierre. Do you not see that we are getting into a quarrel? Let us rather unite. Let us make reciprocal concessions. Besides, it is not well to listen only to miserable self-interest. Humanity is con- cerned, and must not the warming of the people be secured ? Paul. That it is true, and people must have butter to spread on their bread. Jean. Certainly. And they must have a bit of pork for their soup. All Together. Forward, charity ! ' Long live phil- anthrophy ! To-morrow, to-morrow, we wilh take the octroi by assault. Picn-re. Ah, I forgot. One word more which is important. My friends, in this selfish age people are suspicious, and - the purest intentions are often misconstrued. Paul, you plead for wood; Jean, defend hutter ; and I will devote myself to domestio swine. It is best to head off invidious suspiciona 278 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. Paul and Jean (leaving). Upon my word, what a clever fellow ! SECOND TABLEAU. Tlie Common Council. Paul. My dear colleagues, every day great quantities of wood come into Paris, and draw out of it large sums o'f money. If this goes on, we shall all be ruined in three years, and what will become of the poor people? [Bravo.J Let us prohibit foreign wood. I am not speaking for myself, for you could not make a tooth-pick out of all the wood I own. I am, therefore, perfectly dis- interested. [Good, good.] But here is Pierre, who has a park, and he will keep our fellow-citizens from freezing. They will no longer be in a state of dependence on the charcoal dealers of the Yonne. Have you ever thought of the risk we run of dying of cold, if the proprietors of these foreign forests should take it into their heads not to bring any more wood to Paris ? Let us, therefore, prohibit wood. By this means we shall stop the drain of specie, we shall start the wood-chopping business, and open to our workmen a new source of labor and wages. [Applause.] Jean. I second the motion of the Honorable member — a proposition so philanthrophic and so disinterested, as he remarked. It is time that we HE THREE ALDERMEN. 279 should stop this intolerable freedom of entry, which has brought a ruinous competition upon our mar- ket, so that there is not a province tolerably well situated for producing some one article which does not inundate us with it, sell it to us at a low price, and depress Parisian labor. It is the business of the State to equalize the conditions of pro- duction by wisely graduated duties ; to allow the ] entrance from without of whatever is dearer there, than at Paris, and thus relieve us from an unequal. contest. How, for instance, can they expect us to make milk and butter in Paris as against Brittany and Normandy ? Think, gentlemen ; the Bretons have land cheaper, feed more convenient, and labor more abundant. Does not common sense say that the conditions must be equalized by a protecting duty ? I ask that the duty on milk and butter be raised to a thousand per cent., and more, if neces- sary. The breakfasts of the people will cost a little more, but wages will rise ! We shall see the building of stables and dairies, a good trade in churns, and the foundation of new industries laid. I, myself, have not the least interest in this plan, j I am not a cowherd, nor do I desire to become one. I am moved by the single desire to be useful to the laboring classes. [Expressions of approbation.] Pierre. I am happy to see in this assembly statesmen so pure, enlightened, and devoted to the interests of the people. [Cheers.] I admire their 280 SOPHISMS OF PBOTECnON. self-denial, and cannot do better tlian follow such noble examples. I support their motion, and I also make one to exclude Poitou hogs. It is not that I want to become a swineherd or pork dealer, in which case my conscience would forbid my making this motion ; but is it not shameful, gentlemen, that we should be paying tribute to these poor Poitevin peasants who have the audacity to come into our own market, take possession of a business that we could have carried on ourselves, and, after having inundated us with sausages and hams, take from us, perhaps, nothing in return ? Anyhow, who says that the balance of trade is not in their favor, and that we are not compelled to pay them a tribute in money ? Is it not plain that if this Poitevin indus- try were planted in Paris, it would open new fields to Parisian labor ? Moreover, gentlemen, is it not very likely, as Mr. Lestiboudois said, that we buy these Poitevin salted meats, not with our income, but our capital ? "Where will this land us ? Let us nort allow greedy, avaricious and perfidious rivals to come here and sell things cheaply, thus making it impossible for us to produce them ourselves. Aldermen, Paris has given us its confidence, and we ®u8t show ourselves worthy of it The people are without labor, and we must create it, and if salted meat costs them a little more, we shall, at least, have the consciousness that we have sacrificed our interests to those of the masses, as every good Alderman ought to do. [Thunders of applause.] THE THKEE ALDEEMEN. ' 281 A Voice. I hear touch said of the poor people ; but, under the pretext of giving them labor, you begin by taking away from theia that which is worth more than labor itself — wood, butter, and soup. Pierre, Paul and Jean. Vote, vote. Away with your theorists and generalizers ! Let us vote. [The three motions are carried.] THIRD TABLEAU. Twenty Years After. _ ■ Son. Father, decide ; we must leave Paris. Work is slack, and everything is dear. Father. My son, you do not know how hard it is to leave the place where we were born. Son. The worst of all things is to die there of misery. Father. Gro, my son, and seek a more hospitable country. For myself, I will not leave the grave where your mother, sisters and brothers lie. I am eager to find, at last, near them, the rest which is denied me in this city of desolation. Son. Courage, dear father, we will find work elsewhere — in Poitou, Normandy or Brittany. They say that the industry of Paris is gradually transferring itself to those distant countries. Father. It is very natural. Unable to sell us wood and food, they stopped producing more than 282 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTIOW. they needed for themselves, and they devoted their spare time and capital to making those things -which we formerly furnished them. Son. Just as at Paris, they quit making hand- some furniture and fine clofhes, in order to plant trees, and raise hogs and cows. Though quite young, I have seen vast storehouses, sumptuous buildings, and quays thronged with life on those banks of the Seine which are now given up to meadows and forests. Father. While the provinces are filling up with cities, Paris becomes country. What a frightful revolution! Three mistaken Aldermen, aided by public ignorance, have brought down on us this terrible calamity. Son. Tell me this story, my father. Father. It is very simple. Under the pretext of establishing three new trades at Paris, and of thus supplying labor to the workmen, these men secured the prohibition of wood, butter, and meats. They assumed the right of supplying their fellow-citizens with them. These articles rose immediately to an exorbitant price. Nobody made enough to buy them, and the few who could procure them by using up all they made were unable to buy anything else ; consequently all branches of industry stopped at once — all the more so because the provinces no longer offered a market Misery, death, and emi- gration began to depopulate Paris. THE THREE ALDBBMEN. 283 Son. When will this stop ? Father. When Paris has become a meadow and a forest Son. The three Aldermen must have made a great fortune. .Father. At first they made immense profits, but at length, they were involved in the common misery. Son. How was that possible ? Father. You see this ruin ; it was a magnificent house, surrounded by a fine park. If Paris had kept on advancing, Master Pierre would have got more rent from it annually than the whole thing is now worth to him. Son. How can that be, since he got rid of com- petition ? Fatlier. Competition in selling has disappeared ; but competition in buying also disappears every day, and will keep on disappearing until Paris is an open field, and Master Pierre's woodland will be worth no more than an equal number of acres in the forest of Bondy. Thus, a monopoly, like every species of injustice, brings its -own punishment upon itself. Son. This does not seem very plain to me, but the decay of Paris is undeniable. Is there, then, no means of repealing this unjust measure that Pierre and his colleagues adopted twenty years ago ? Father. I will confide my secret to you. I will 284 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. remain at Paris for this purpose ; I will call the people to my aid. It depends on them whether they will replace the octroi on its old basis, and dis- miss from it this fatal principle, which is grafted on it, and has grown there like a parasite fungus. Son. Tou ought to succeed on the very first day. Falher. No ; on the contrary, the work is a dif- ficult and laborious one. Pierre, Paul and Jean understand one another perfectly. . They are ready to do anything rather than allow the entrance of wood, butter and meat into Paris. They even have on their side the people, who clearly see the labor which these three protected branches of business give, who know how many wood-choppers and cow- drivers it gives employment to, but who cannot obtain so clear an idea of the labor that would spring up in the free air of liberty. Son. If this is all that is needed, you will enlighten them. Father. My child, at your age, one doubts at nothing. If I wrote, the people would not read ; for all their time is occupied in supporting a wretched existence. If I speak, the Aldermen will shut my ftiouth. The people will, therefore, remain long in their fatal error; political parties, which build their hopes on their passions, attempt to play upon their prejudices, rather than to dispel them. I shall then have to deal with the powers that be — THE THREE ALDERMEN. 285 the people and the parties. 'I see that a storm will burst on the head of the audacious person who dares to rise against an iniquity which is so firmly rooted in the country.- Son. You will have justice and truth on your side. Failier. And they will have force and calumny. If I were only young ! But age and suffering have exhausted my strength. Son. Well, father, devote all that you have left to the service of the country. Begin this work of emancipation, and leave to me for an inheritance the task of finishing it. rOPETH T-iBLEAtJ. The Agitation. Jacques Bonhomme. Parisians, let us demand the reform of the octroi ; let it be put back to what it was. Let every citizen be free to buy wood, butter and meat where it seems good to him. The People. Hurrah for LIBERTY ! Pierre. Parisians, do not allow yourselves to be seduced by these words. Of what avail is the freedom of purchasing, if you have not the means ? arid how can you have the means, if labor is want- ing ? Can Paris produce wood as cheaply as the forest of Bondy, or meat at as low price as Poitou, or butter as easily as Normandy ? If you open the 286 SOPHISMS )F PROTECTION'. doors to these rival products, what will become of the wood cutters, pork dealers, and cattle drivers ? They cannot do without protection. The People. Hurrah for pkotection ! Jacques. Protection I But do they protect you, workmen? Do not you compete with one another? Let the wood dealers then suffer competition in their tura They have no right to raise the price of their wood by law, unless they, also, by law, raise wages. Do you not still love equality ? The People. Hurrah for equality ! Pierre. Do not listen to this factious fellow. We have raised the price of wood, meat, and but- ter, it is true ; but it is in order that we may give good wages to the workmen. We are moved by charity. The People. Hurrah for charity ! Jacques. Use the octroi, if you can, to raise wages, or do not use it to raise the price of com- modities. The Parisians do not ask for charity, but justice. The People. Hurrah for JUSTICE ! Pierre. It is precisely the dearness of products which will, by reflex action, raise wages. The People. Hurrah for DEARNESS ! Jacques. If butter is dear, it is not because you pay workmen well ; it is not even that you may make great profits ; it is only because Paris is ill ■situated for this business, and because you desired THE THREE ALDERMEN. 287 that they should do in the city what ought to be done in the country, and in the country what was done in the city. The people have no more labor, only they labor at something else. They get no Tfiore wages, but they do not buy things as cheaply. The People. Hurrah for CHEAPNESS ! Pierre. This person seduces you with his fine words. Let us state the question plainly. Is it not true that if we admit butter, wood, and meat, we shall be inundated with them, and die of a plethora ? There is, then, no other way in which we can preserve ourselves from this new inundation, than to shut the door, and we can keep up the price of things only by causing scarcity artificially. A Very Few Voices. Hurrah for SCARCITY ! Jacques. Let us state the question as it is. Among all the Parisians we can divide only what is in Paris ; the less wood, butter and meat there is, the smaller each one's share will be. There will be less if we exclude than if we admit. Parisians, individual abundance can exist only where there is general abundance. The People. Hurrah for ABUNDANCE ! Pierre. No matter what this man says, he can- not prove to you that it is to your interest to submit to unbridled competition. The People. Down with COMPETITION ! Jacques. Despite all this man's declamation, he cannot make you enjoy the sweets of restriction. 288 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. The People. Down with bestrictioit ! Pierre. I declare to you that if the poor dealers in cattle and hogs are deprived of their livelihood, if they are sacrificed to theories, I will not be answerable for public order. Workmen, distrust this man. He is an agent of perfidious Normandy ; he is under the pay of foreigners. He is a traitor, and must be hanged. [The people keep silent] Jacques. Parisians, all that I say now, I said to you twenty years ago, when it occurred to Pierre to use the octroi for his gain and your loss. I am not an agent of Normandy. Hang me if you will, but this will not 'prevent oppression from being oppression. Friends, you must kill neither Jacques nor Pierre, but liberty if it frightens you, or restriction if it hurts you. The Peoph. Let us hang nobody, but let ua emancipate everybody. SOMETHING ELSE. 289 XIY. SOMETHING ELSE. — ^What is restriction ? — A partial prohibition. — What is prohibition ? — An absolute restriction. — So that what is said of one is true of the other ? — Yes, comparatively. They bear the same rela- tion to each other that the arc of the circle does to the circle. — Then if prohibition is bad, restriction cannot be good. — No more than the arc can be straight if the circle is curved. — ^What is the common name for restriction and prohibition ?- — Protection. — What is the definite effect of protection ? — To require from men harder labor for the same result. — Why are men so attached to the protective system ? — Because, since liberty would accomplish the same result with less labor, this apparent diminu- tion of labor frightens them. 26 290 SOPHISMS OF PBOTECTION. — Wby do you say apparent ? — Because all labor economized can be devoted to something else. —What? ■ — That cannot and need not be determined. —Why ? — Because, if the total of the comforts of France could be gained with a diminution of one-tenth on the total of its labor, no one could determine what comforts it would procure with the labor remain- ing at its disposal. One person would prefer to be better clotbed, another better fed, another better taught, and another more amused. — Explain the workings and effect of protection. — It is not an easy matter. Before taking hold of a complicated instance, it must be studied in the simplest one. — Take the simplest you choose. — Do you recollect how Eobinson Crusoe, having no saw, set to work to make a plank ? — Yes. He cut down a tree, and then with his ax hewed the trunk on both sides until he got it down to the thickness of a board. — And that gave him an abundance of work ? — Fifteen full days. — What did he live on during this time ? — His provisions. — What happened to the ax ? — It was all blunted. SOMETHING ELSE. 291 — Very good ; but there is one thing which, per- haps, you do not know. At the moment that Kobinson gave the first blow with his ax, he saw a plank which the waves had cast up on the shore. — Oh, the lucky accident ! He ran to pick it up? ^ ' , — It was his first impulse ; but he checked him- self, reasoning thus : "If I go after this plank, it will cost me but the labor of carrying it and the time spent in going to and returning from the shore. "But if I make a plank with my ax, I shall in the" first place obtain work for fifteen days, then I shall wear out my ax, which will give me an oppor- tunity of repairing it, and I shall consume my provisions, which will be a third source of labor, since they must be replaced. ISTow, labor is wealth. It is plain that I will ruin myself if I pick up this stranded board. It is important to protect my per- sonal labor, and now that I think of it, I can create myself additional labor by kicking this board back into the sea.'' —But this reasoning was absurd ! —Certainly. Nevertheless it is that adopted by every nation which protects itself by prohibition. It rejects the plank which is offered it in exchange for a little labor, in order to give itself more labor. It sees a gain even in the labor of the custom house officer. This answers' to the trouble which Eobin- 292 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION. son took to give back to the waves the present they wished to make him. Consider the nation a collec- tive being, and you will not find an atom of difier- ence between its reasoning and that of Robinson. — Did not Robinson see that he could use the time saved in doing something else ? — "What 'somelhing else' ? — So long as one has wants and time, one has always something to do. I am not bound to specify the labor that he could undertake. — I can specify very easily that which he would have avoided. — I assert, that Robinson, with incredible blind- ness, confounded labor with its result, the end with the means, and I will prove it to you. — It is not necessary. But this is the restrictive or prohibitory system in its simplest form. If it appears absurd to you, thus stated, it is because the two qualities of producer and consumer are here united in the same person. — Let us pass, then, to a more complicated instance. — Willingly. Some time after all this, Robinson having met Friday, they united, and began to work in common. They hunted for six hours each morning and brought home four hampere of game. They worked in the garden for six hours -each tvfternoon, and obtained four baskets of veoetablea One day a canoe touched at the Island of De- SOMETHING ELSE. 293 spair. A good-looking stranger landed, and was allowed to dine with our two hermits. He tasted, and praised the products of the garden, and before taking leave of his hosts, said to them : " Generous Isknders, I dwell in a country much richer in game than this, but where horticulture is unknown. It would be easy for me to bring you every evening four hampers of game if you would give me only two baskets of vegetables." At these words Robinson and Friday stepped on one side, to have a consultation, and the debate which followed is too interesting not to be given in extenso : Friday. Friend, what do you think of it ? Robinson. If we accept we are ruined. Friday. Is that certain ? Calculate ! Robinson. It is all calculated. Hunting, crushed out by competition, will be a lost branch of indus- try for us. Friday. "What diiference does that make, if we have the game? Robinson. Theory ! It will not be the product of our labor. Friday. Yes, it will, since we will have to give vegetables to get it. Robinson. Then what shall we make ? Friday. The four hampers of game cost us six hours' labor. The stranger gives them to us for two baskets of vegetables, which take us but three Loi'js. Thus three hours remain at our disposal. 294 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTIOK. Robinson. Say rather that they are taken from our activity. There is our loss. Labor is ivealth, und if we lose a fourth of our time we are one- fourth poorer. Friday. Friend, you make an enormous mistake. The same amount of game and vegetables and Ihrec free hours to boot make progress, or there is none in the world. Robimon. Mere generalities. "What will we do with these three hours ? Friday. We will do something else. Robinson. Ah, now I have you. You can specify nothing. It is very easy to say something else — something eh^\ Friday. Ws will fish. We will adorn our ihouses. We will read the Bibla Robinson. Utopia ! Is it certain that we will do this rather than that ? Friday. Well, if we have no wants, we will rest. Is rest nothing? Robinson. When one rests one dies of hunger. Friday. Friend, you are in a vicious circle. I speak of a rest which diminishes neither our gains nor our vegetables. You always foi-get that by means of our commerce with this stranger, nine hours of labor will give us as much food as twelve now do. Robinson. It is eaity to see that you were not reared in Europe. Perhaps you have never read {SOMETHING ELSE. 295 the Moniteur Industrielf It would have taught you this : " All time saved is a dear loss. Bating is not the important matter, but working. Noth- ing which we consume counts, if it is not the pro- duct of our labor. Do you wish to know whether you are rich ? Do not look at your comforts, but at your trouble ?" This is what the Moniteur Indus- triel would have taught you. I, who am not a theo- rist, see but the loss of our hunting. Friday. What a strange perversion of ideas. But— Eabinson. No bids. Besides, there are political reasons for rejecting the interested offers of this perfidious stranger, Friday. Political reasons ! Robinson. Yes. In the first place he makea these offers only because they are for his advantage. Friday. So much the better, since they are for ours also. Bobinson. Then by these exchanges we shall become dependent on him. Friday. And he on us. We need his game, he our vegetables, and we will live in good friendship. Bobinson. Fancy ! Do you want I should leave you without an answer ? Friday. Let us see ; I am still waiting a good reason. Hobinson. Supposing that the stranger learns to cultivate a garden, and that his island is more fertilo than ours. Do you see the consequences ? 296 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. Friday. Yes. Our relations with the stranger wiil stop. He will take no more vegetables from us, since he can get them at home with less trouble. He will bring us no more game, since we will have nothing to give in exchange, and we will be then just where you want us to be now. Robinson. Short-sighted savage! You do not see that after having destroyed our hunting, by inundating us with game, he will kill our garden- ing by overwhelming us with vegetables. Friday. But he will do that only so long as we give him something else; that is to say, so long as we find something else to produce, which will economize our labor. Rohinson. Something else — something else I You always come back to that. You are very vague, friend Friday ; there is nothing practical in your views. The contest lasted a long time, and, as often hap- pens, left each one convii\eed that he was right However, Robinson having great influence over Friday, his views prevailed, and when the sti'anger came for an answer, Robinson said to liim : " Stranger, in order that your^proposition may be accepted, we must be quite sure of two things : " The first is, that your island is not richer in game than ours, for we will struggle but with equal arms. " The second is, that you will lose by the bargain. SOMETHING ELSE. 297 For, as in every exchange there is necessarily a gainer and a loser, we would be cheated, if you were not What have you to say ? " "Nothing, nothing,'' replied the stranger, who burst out laughing, and returned to his canoe. — The story would not be bad if Eobinson was not so foolish. — He is no more so than the committee in Haute- ville street. — Oh, there is a great difference. You suppose one solitary man, or, what comes to the same thing, two men^ living together. This is not our M'orld ; the diversity of occupations, and the intervention of merchants and money, change the question materially. — All this complicates transactions, but does not ■ change their nature. — What ! Do you propose to compare modern commerce to mere exchanges ? — Commerce is but a multitude of exchanges ; the real nature of the exchange is identical with the real nature of commerce, as small labor is of the same nature with great, and as the gravitation which impels an atom is of the same nature as that which attracts a world. — Thus, according to you, these arguments, which in Eobinson's mouth are so false, are no less so in the mouths of our protectionists ? — Yes; only error is hidden, better under the complication of circumstances. 37 298 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECTION. — Well, now, select some instance from what haa actually occurred. — Very well ; in France, in view of custom and [ the exigencies of the climate, cloth is an useful article. Is it the essential thing to make it, or to have it f — A pretty question! To have it, we must make it — That is not necessary. It is certain that to have it some one must make it ; but it is not neces- sary that the person or country using it should make it You did not produce that which clothes you so well, nor France the coflfee it uses for breakfast — But I purchased my cloth, and France ita coflfee. • — Exactly, and with what ? — With specie. — But you did not make the specie, nor did France. — We bought it. —With what ? — With our products which went to Peru. — Then it is in reality your labor that you exchange for cloth, and French labor that is exchanged for coffee ? — Certainly. — Then it is not absolutely necessary to make ■what one consumes ? SOMETHING ELSE. 299 — ^No, if one makes something else, and gives it in exchange. — In other words, France has two ways of pro- curing a given quantity of cloth. The first is ' to make it, and the second is to make something else, and exchange that something else abroad for cloth. Of these two ways, which is the best ? — I do not know. — Is it not that which, for a fixed amount of laior, gives the greatest quantity of cloth f —It seems so. — ^Which is best for a nation, to have the choice of these two ways, or to have the l£tw forbid its using one of them at the risk of rejecting the best? — It seems to me that it would be best for the nation to have the choice, since in these matters it always makes a good selection. — The law which prohibits the introduction of foreign cloth, decides, then, that if France wants cloth, it must make it at home, and that it is for- bidden to make that something eke with which it could purchase foreign cloth ? — That is true. — And as it is obliged to make cloth, and for- bidden to make something else, just because the other thing would require less labor (without which France would have no occasion to do anything with it), the law virtually decrees, that for a certair 300 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. amount of labor, France shall have but one yard of cloth, making it itself, when, for the same amount of labor, it could have had two yards, by making something else. — But what other thing? — No matter what. Being free to choose, it will make something else only so long as there is some- tiling else to make. — That is possible ; but I cannot rid myself of the idea that the foreigners may send us cloth and not take something else, in which case we shall be prettily caught Under all circumstances, this is the objection, even from your own point of view. You admit that France will make this something else, which is to be exchanged for cloth, with less labor than if it had made the cloth itself? — ^Doubtless. — Then a certain quantity of its labor will become mert? — ^Yes ; but people will be no worse clothed — a little circumstance which causes the whole misun- derstanding. Eobinson lost sight of it, and our protectionists do not see it, or pretend not to. The stranded plank thus paralyzed for fifteen days Kobinson's labor, so far as it was applied to the making of a plank, but it did not deprive him of it Distinguish, then, between these two kinds of diminution of labor, one resulting in privation, and the other in comfort These two things are very LITTLE AESENAL OP THE FREE TEADER. 301 different, and if you assimilate them, you reason like Robinson. In the most complicated, as in the most simple instances, the sophism consists in this : Judging of the utility of labo'^ hy its duration and intensity, and not hy its results, which leads to this economic policy, a reduction of the results of labor, in order to increase its dura.tion and intensity. XV. THE LITTLE ARSENAL OP THE FREE TRADER. — ^If they say to you : There are no absolute principles ; prohibition may be bad, and restriction good — Eeply : Eestriction prohibits all that it keeps' from coming in. — If they say to you : Agriculture is the nurs- ing mother of the country — Eeply: That -which feeds a country is not exactly agriculture, but grain. — If they sa,y to you : The basis of the suste- nance of the people is agriculttfre — Eeply : The basis of the sustenance of the peo- ple is grain. Thus a law which causes t^vo bushels of grain to be obtained by agricultural labor at the expense ■ of four bushels, which the same labor 302 SOPHISMS OF PKOTECTION. would have produced but for it, far firom being a law of sustenance, is a law of starvation. —If they say to you : A restriction on the admission of foreign grain leads to more cultiva- tion, and, consequently, to a greater home produc- tion — Eeply : It leads to sowing on the rocks of the mountains and the sands of the sea. To milk and steadily milk, a cow gives more milk ; for who can tell the moment when not a drop more can be obtained? But the drop costs dear. — If they say to you : Let bread be deai-, and the wealthy farmer will enrich the artisans — Keply : Bread is dear when there is little of it, a thing which can make but poor, or, if you please, rich people who are starving. ■ — If they insist on it, saying : When food ia dear, wages rise — Reply by showing that in April, 1847, five-sixths of the workingmen were beggai-g. — If they say to you : The profits of the work- ingmen must rise with the dearness of food — Reply : This is equivalent to saying that in an unprovisioned vessel everybody has the same num- ber of biscuits whether he has any or not — If they say to you : A good price must be secured for those who sell grain — Reply : Certainly ; but good wages must be secured to those who buy it. LITTLE AESENAL OF THE FREE TRADER. 303 — If they say to you : The land owners, who make the law, have raised the price of food with- out troubling themselves about wages, because they know that when food becomes dear, wages naturally ' rise — Eeply: On this principle, when workingmen come to make the law, do not blame them if they fix a high rate of wages without troubling them- selves to protect grain, for they know that if wages are raised, articles of food will naturally rise in price. — If they say to you : What, then, is to be done? Reply : Be just to everybody. — If they say to you : It is essential that a great country should manufacture iron — Reply : The most essential thing is that this great country should have iron. — ^If they say to you: It is necessary that a- great country should manufacture clotL Reply : It is more necessary that the citizens of this great country should have cloth. — If they say to you : Labor is wealth — Reply : It is false. And, by way of developing this, add : A bleed- ing is not health, and the proof of it is, that it is done to restore health. — If they say to you : To compel men to work over rocks and get an ounce of iron from a ton of 304 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. ore, is to increase their labor, and, consequently, their wealth — Reply : To compel men to dig wells, by deny- ing them the use of river water, is to add to their icseless labor, but not their wealth. — If they say to you : The sun gives his heat and light without requiring remuneration — Eeply : So much the better for me, since it costs me nothing to see distinctly. — And if they reply to you : Industry in gen- eral loses what you would have paid for lights — Eetort : No, for having paid nothing to the sun, I use that which it saves me in paying for clothes, furniture and candles. — So, if they say to you : These English rascals have capital which pays them nothing — Eeply : Sd much the better for us ; they will not make 'us pay interest — If they say to you : These perfidious English- men find iron and coal at the same spot — Eeply : So much the better for us ; they will not make us pay anything for bringing them together. — If they say to you : The Swiss have rich pas- tures which cost little — Eeply : The advantage is on our side, for they will ask for a lesser quantity of our labor to fur- nish our farmers oxen and our stomachs food. —If they say to you : Tlie lands in the Crimea are worth nothing, and pay no taxes — LITTLK ARSENAL OF THE FREE TRADER. 305- Eeply : The gain is on our side, since we buy grain free from, those charges. — If they say to you : The serfs of Poland work without wages — • Eeply : The loss is theirs and the gain is ours, since their labor is deducted from the price of the grain which their masters sell us. — Then, if they say to you : Other nations have many advantages over us — Eeply : By exchange, they are forced to let us- share in them. — If they say to you : With liberty we shall be swamped with bread, beef a la mode, coal, and coats — - Eeply : We shall be neither cold nor hungry. — If they say to you : With what shall we pay ? Eeply : Do not be troubled about that. If we are to be inundated, it will be because we are able to pay. If we cannot pay we will not be inun- dated. — If they say to you : I would allow free trade, if a stranger, in bringing us one thing, took away another ; but he will carry off our specie — Eeply : Neither specie nor coffee grow in the fields of Beauce or come out of the manufactories of Elbeuf For us to pay a foreigner with specie is like paying him with coffee. — If they say to you : Eat meat- Reply : Let it come in. S06 SOPHISMS OF FEOTECnON. — If they say to you, like the Presse : When you have not the money to buy bread with, buy beef — Eeply : This advice is as wise as that of Vau- tour to his tenant, " If a person has not money to pay his rent with, he ought to have a house of his own." — If they say to you, like the Presse : The State ought to teach the people why and how it should eat meat — Eeply : Only let the State allow the meat free entrance, and the most civilized people in the world are old enough to learn to eat it without any teacher. — If they say to you : The State ought to know everything, and foresee everything, to guide the people, and the people have only to let themselves be guided — Eeply : Is there a State outside of the people, and a human foresight outside of humanity? Archimedes might have repeated all the days of his life, " With a lever and a fulcrum I will move the world," but he could not have moved it, for want of those two things. The fulcrum of the State is the nation, and nothing is madder than to build so many hopes on the State ; that is to say, to assume a collective science and foresight, after having established individual folly and short-sightedness. —If they say to you : My God ! I ask no favors, LITTLE AESENAL OF THE FREE TRADER. 307 but only a duty on grain and meat, which may compensate for the heavy taxes to which France is subjected ; a mere little duty, equal to what these taxes add to the cost of my grain — Eeply : A thousand pardons, but I, too, pay taxes. If, then, the protection which you vote yourself results in burdening for me, your grain with your proportion of the taxes, your insinuating demand aims at nothing less than the establishment between us of the following arrangement, thus worded by yourself: "Since the public burdens are heavy, I, who sell grain, will pay nothing at all; and you, my neighbor, the buyer, shall pay two parts, to wit, your share and mine." My neigh- bor, the grain dealer, you may have power on your side, but not reason. — ^If they say to you : It is, however, very hard for me, a tax payer, to compete in my own market with foreigners who pay none — Eeply : First, This is not your market, but our market. I who live on grain, and pay for it, must be counted for something. Secopdly. Few foreigners at this time are free from taxes. Thirdly. If the tax which you vote repays to you, in roads, canals and safety, more than it costs you, you are not justified in driving away, at my expense, the competition of foreigners who do not pay the tax but who do not have the safety, roada 808 SOPHISMS OF PEOTECTION'. and canals. It is the same as saying : I want a compensating duty, because I have fine clothes, stronger horses and better plows than the Eussian laborer. Fourthly. If the tax does not repay what it^ costs, do not vote it Fifthly. If, after you have voted a tax, it is your pleasure to escape its operation, invent a system which will throw it on foreigners. But the tariff only throws your proportion on me, when I already have enough of my own. — If they say to you : Freedom of commerce is necessary among the Russians iJiat ihey may exchange iheir products with advantage (opinion of M. Thiers, April, 1847)— Eeply : This freedom is necessary everywhere, and for^he same reason. — If they say to you : Each country has its wants ; it is according to that that it must act (M. Thiers)— Eeply : It is according to that that it acts of itsdf when no one hinders it —If they say to you : Since we have no sheet iron, its admission must be allowed (M. Thiers) — Reply , Thank you, kindly. — ^If they say to you : Our merchant marine must have freight ; owing to the lack of return cargoes our vessels cannot compete with foreign ■ones — THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT HAND. 309 Eeply : "When you want to do everything at home, you can have cargoes neither going nor com- ing. It is as absurd to wish for a navy under a prohibitory system as to wish for carts where all transportation is forbidden. — If they say to you : Supposing that protection is unjust, everything is founded on it; there are moneys invested, and rights acquired, and it cannot be abandoned without suffering — Eeply : Every injustice profits some one (ex- cept, perhaps, restriction, which in the long run profits no one), and to use as an argument the disturbance which the cessation of the injustice causes to the per- son profiting by it, is to say that an injustice, only because it has existed for a moment, should be eternal. XVI. THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT HAND. [Seport to the King,] Sire — ^When we see these men of the Libre Eehange audaciously disseminating their doctrines, and maintaining that the right of buying and selling is implied by that of ownership (a piece of insolence that M. Billault has criticised like a true 810 SOPHISMS OF PROTECTION. lawyer), we may be allowed to entertain serious fears as to tbe destiny of national labor ; for what will Frenchmen do with their arms and intelligences when they are free ? I The Ministry which you have honored with your confidence has naturally paid great attention to so serious a subject, and has sought in its wisdom for a protection which might be substituted for that which appears compromised. It proposes to you to forbid your faithful subjects the use of the right hand. Sire, do not wrong us so far as to think that we lightly adopted a measure which, at the first glance, may appear odd. Deep study of the protective system has revealed to us this syllogism, on which it entirely rests : The more one labors, the richer one is. The more difiiculties one has to conquer, the more one kbors. Ergo, the more difficulties one has to conquer, the richer one is. What is protection, really, but an ingenious appli- cation of this formal reasoning, which is so compact that it would resist the subtlety of M. Billault himself? Let us personify the country. Let us look on it as a collective being, with thirty million mouths, and, consequently, sixty million arn be eradi- cated at the risk of some temporary suff-wing ?" These are, it appears to me, the sad vmd irritat- ing reflections which must be excitid in your minds by the active and superficial crusade which is being carried on against capital and ii iterest On the other hand, there are moments in ^iiioh, 7 am 356 capitaTj and interest. conviuced, doubts are awakened in your minds, and scruples in your conscience. You say to your- selves sometimes, " But to assert that capital ought not to produce interest, is to say that he who has created instruments of labor, or materials, or provi- sions of any kind, ought to yield them up without compensation. Is that just ? And then, if it is so, who would lend these instruments, these materials, these provisions ? who would take care of them ? who. even would create them ? Every one would consume his proportion, and the human race would never advance a step. Capital would be no longer formed, since there would be no interest in forming it. It will become exceedingly scarce. A singular step toward gratuitous loans ! A singular means of improving the condition of borrowers, to make it impossible for them to borrow at any price! What would become of labor itself? for there will be no money advanced, and not one single kind of labor can be mentioned, not even the chase, which can be pursued without money in hand. And, as for ourselves, what would become of us? What! we are not to be allowed to boiTow, in order to work in the prime of life, nor to lend, that we may enjoy repose in its decline ? The law will rob us of the prospect of laying by a little property, because it will prevent us from gaining an3' advan- tage from it. It will deprive us of all stimulus to save at the present time, and of all hope of repose CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 357 for tlie luture. It is useless to exhaust ourse'.ves with fatigue ; we must abandon the idea of leaving our sons and da-ughters a little property, since modern science renders it useless, for we should become trafficers in men if we were to lend it on interest Alas ! the world which these persons would open before us as an imaginary good, is still more dreary and desolate than that which they condemn, for hope, at any rate, is not banished from the latter." Thus in all respects, and in every point of view, the question is a serious one. Let us hasten to arrive at a solution. Our civil code has a chapter entitled, " On the manner of transmitting property." I do not think it gives a very complete nomenclature on this point. When a man by his labor has made some useful thing— in other words, when he has created a value — it can only pass into the hands of another by one of the following modes : as a gift, by the right of inheritance, by exchange, loan, or theft. One word upon each of these, except the last, although it plays a greater part in the world than we may think. A gift, needs no definition. It is essentially voluntary and spontaneous. It depends exclu- sively upon the giver, and the receiver cannot be said to have any right to it. Without a doubt, morality and religion make it a duty for men, espe- cially the rich, to deprive themselves voluntarily 358 CAPITAL AND INTEI EST. of that which they possess, in favor of their less fortunate brethren. But this is an entirely moral obligation. If it were to be asserted on principle, admitted in practice, or sanctioned by law, that ' every man has a right to the property of another, the gift would have no merit, charity and gratitude would be no longer virtues. Besides, such a doc- trine would suddenly and universally arrest labor and production, as severe cold congeals water and suspends animation, for who would work if there was no longer to be any connection between labor and the satisfying of our wants ? Political economy has not treated of gifts. It has hence been con- cluded that it disowns them, and that it is therefore a science devoid of heart This is a ridiculous accusation. That science which treats of the laws resulting fi'om the reciprocity of services, had no business to inquire into the consequences of gener- osity with respect to him who receives, nor into its effects, perhaps still more precious, tn him who gives ; such considerations belong evidently to the science of morals. We must allow the sciences to have limits ; above all, we must not accuse them of denying or undervaluing what they look upon as foreign to their department. The right of inheritance, against which so much. has been objected of late, is one of the forms of gift, and assuredly the most natural of all. That which a man has produced, he may consume, ex CAPITAL A^D INTEEEST. 359 change, of give; what can be more natural than that he should give it to his children ? Jt is this power, more than any other, which inspires him with courage to labor and to save. Do you know why the principle of right of inheritance is thus called in question ? Because it is imagined that the property thus transmitted is plundered from the masses. This is a fatal error ; political econ- omy demonstrates, in the most peremptory manner, that all value produced is a creation which does no harm to any person whatever. For that reason, it may be consumed, and, still more, transmitted, without hurti_ng any one ; but I shall not pursue these reflections, which do not belong to the subject. Exchange is the principal d-epartment of political economy, because it is by far the most frequent method of transmitting property, according to the free and voluntary agreements of the laws and effects of which this science treats. Properly speaking, exchange is the reciprocity of services. The parties say between themselves, " Give me this, and I will give you that ;" or, " Do this for me, and I will do that for you." It is well to remark (for this will throw a new light on the notion of value), that the second form is always implied in the first. When it is said, " Do this for me, and I will do that for you," an exchange of service for service is proposed. Again, when it is said, " Give me this, and I will give you that," it 360 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. is the same as saying, " I yield to you what 1 have done, yield to me what you have done." The labor is past, instead of present ; but the exchange is not the less governed by the comparative valua- tion of the two services ; so that it is quite correct to say, that the principle of value is in the services rendered and received on account of the produc- tions exchanged, rather than in productions them- selves. In reality, services are scarcely ever exchanged directly. There is a medium, which is termed money. Paul has completed a coat, for which be wishes to receive a little bread, a little wine, a little oil, a visit from a doctor, a ticket for the play, etc. The exchange cannot be effected in kind ; so what does Paul do? He first exchanges his coat for some money, which is called sale ; then he exchanges this money again for the things which he wants, which is called purchase ; and now, onlj-, has the reciprocity of services completed its circuit ; now, only, the labor and the compensation are balanced in the same individual, — " I have done this for society, it has done that for me." In a word, it is only now that the exchange is actual) v accom- plished. Thus, nothing can be more correct than this observation of J. B. Sa}- : '• Since the inti'O- duction of money, every exchange is" resolved into two elements, sale and purchase. It is the reunion of these two elements which reriders the excbano'e complete." CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 361 We must remark, also, that the constant appear- ance of money in every exchange has overturn ed and misled all our ideas ; men have ended in think- ing that money was true riches, and that to multiply it was to multiply services and products. Hence the prohibitory system ; hence paper money ; hence the celebrated aphorism, " What one gains the other loses ;" and all the errors which have ruined the earth, and imbrued it with blood.* After much research it has been found, that in order to make the two services exchanged of equivalent value, and in order to render the exchange equitable, the best means was to allow it to be free. How- ever plausible, at first sight, the intervention of the State might be, it was soon perceived that it is always oppressive to one or other of the contracting parties. When we look into these subjects, we are always compelled to reason upon this maxim, that equal value results from liberty. We have, in fact, no other' means of knowing whether, at a given moment, two services are of the same value, but that of examining whether they can be readily and freely exchanged. Allow the State, which is the same thing as force, to interfere on one side or the other, and from that moment all the means of appreciation will be complicated and entangled, instead of becoming clear. It ought to be the part ♦ This error will be combated in a pamphlet, entitled " Of reed Money J^ 32 362 CAPITAL AND INTEEEST. of the State to prevent, and, above all, to repress, artifice and fraud ; that is, to secure liberty, and not to violate it I have enlarged a little upon exchange, although loan is my principal object; my excuse is, that I conceive that there is in a loan an actual exchange, an actual service rendered by the lender, and which makes the borrower liable to an equivalent service, — two services, whose com- parative value can only be appreciated, like that of all possible services, by freedom. Now, if it is so, the perfect lawfulness of what is called house-rent, farm-rent, interest, will be explained and justified. Let US consider the case of loan. Suppose two men exchange two services or two objects, whose equal value is beyond all dispute. Suppose, for example, Peter says to Paul, " Give me ten sixpences, I will give you a five-shilling piece." We cannot imagine an equal value more unquestionable. When the bargain is made, neither party has any claim upon the other. The ex- changed services are equal. Thus it follows, that if one of the parties wishes to introjjuce into the bargain an additional clause, advantageous to him- self, but unfavorable to the other party, he must agree to a second clause, which shall re-establish the equilibrium, and the law of justice. It would be absurd to deny the justice of a second clause of compensation. This granted, we will suppose that Peter, after having said to Paul, " Give me ten CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 863 sixpences, I will give you a crown," adds, "you shall give me the tea sixpences now^ and I will give you the crown-piece in a year /" it is very evident that "this new proposition alters the claims and advantages of the- bargain ; that it alters the pro- portion of the two services. Does it not appear plainly enough, in fact, that Peter asks of Paul a new and an additional service ; one of a different kind? Is it not as if he had said, "Eender me the service of allowing me to use for my profit, for a year, five shillings which belong to you, and which you might have used for yourself " ? And what good reason have you to maintain that Paul is bound to render this especial service gratuitously • that he has no right to demand anything more in consequence of this requisition ; that the State ought to interfere to force him to submit ? Is it not incomprehensible that the economist, who preaches such a doctrine to tlie people, can reconcile it .with his principle of the redprodiy of services'^ Here Ihave introduced cash ; I have been led to do so by a desire to place, side by side, two objects of exchange, of a perfect and indisputable equality of value. I was anxious to be prepared for objec- tions ; but, on the other hand, my demonstration would have been more striking still, if I had illus- trated my principle by an agreement for exchanging the services or the productions themselves. Suppose, for example, a house and a vessel of a 364 CAPITAL ANB INTEREST. value so perfectly equal that their proprietors are disposed to exchange them even-handed, without excess or abatement. In fact, let the bargain be settled by a lawyer. At the moment of each tak- ing possession, the ship-owner says to the citizen, " Yery well; the transaction is completed, and nothing can prove its perfect equity better than oar free and voluntary conseat. Our conditions thus fixed, I shall propose to you a little practical modification. You shall let me have your house to-day, but I shall not put you in possession of my ship for a year ; and the reason I make this demand of you is, that, during this year of delay, I wish to use the vessel." That we may not be embar- rassed by considerations relative to the detorioration of the thing lent, I will suppose the ship-owner to add, " I will engage, at the end of the year, to hand over to you the vessel in the state in which it is to- day." I ask of every candid man, I ask of M. Proudhon himself, if the citizen has not a right to answer, " The new clause which you propose en- tirely alters the proportion or the equal value of the exchanged services. By it, I shall be deprived, for the space of a year, both at once of my house and of your vessel. By it, you will make use of both. If, in the absence of this clause, the bargaiu w&s just, for the same reason the clause is injurious to me. It stipulates for a loss to me, and a gain to you. You are requiring of me a new service j I CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 865 have a right to refuse, or to require of you, as a compensation, an equivalent service." If the par- ties are agreed upon this compensation, the princi- ple of which is incontestable, we can easily distin- guish two transactions in one, two exchanges of service in one. First, there is the exchange of the house for the vessel ; after this, there is the delay granted by one of the parties, and the compensa- tion correspondent to this delay yielded by the other. These two new services take the generic and abstract names of credit and interest. But names do not change the nature of things ; and I defy any one to dare to maintain that there exists here, when all is done, a service for a service, or a reciprocity of services. To say that one of these services does not challenge the other, to say that the first ought to be rendered gratuitously, without injustice, is to say that injustice consists in the reciprocity of services — that justice consists in one of the parties giving and not receiving, which is a contradiction in terms. To give an idea of interest and its mechanism, allow me to make use of two or three anecdotes. But, first, I must say a few words upon capital. There are some persons who imagine that capital is money, and this is precisely the reason why they deny its productiveness; for, as M. Thore says, crowns are not endowed with the power of repro- ducing thenaselves. But it is not true that capital 366" CAPITAL AND INTEREST. and money are the same thing. Before the dis- covery of the precious metals, there were capitalists in the world ; and I venture to say that at that time, as now, everybody was a capitalist, to a certain extent What is capital, then ? It is composed of three things : 1st. Of the materials upon which men operate, when these materials have already a value commu- nicated by some human effort, which has bestowed upon them the principle of remuneration — wool, flax, leather, silk, wood, etc. 2nd. Instruments which are used for working — tools, machines, ships, carriages, etc. 3rd. Provisions which are consumed during labor — victuals, stuffs, houses, etc. Without these things, the labor of man would be unproductive, and almost void ; yet these very things have required much work, especially at firet This is the reason that so much value has been attached to the possession of them, and also that it is perfectly lawful tb exchange and to sell them, to make a profit of them if used, to gain remuneration from them if lent. Now for my anecdotes. THE SACK OF CORN. Mathurin, in other respects as poor us Job, and obliged to earn his bread by day-labor, became, CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 367 nevertheless, by some inheritance, the owner of a fine piece of uncultivated land. He was exceed- ingly anxious to cultivate it. " Alas !" said he, " to make ditches, to raise fences, to break the soil, to clear away the brambles and stones, to plough it, to sow it, might briirg me a living in a year or two ; but certainly not to-day, or to-morrow. It is im- possible to set about farming it, without previously saving some provisions, for my subsistence until the harvest ; and I know, by experience, that pre- paratory labor is indispensable, in order to render present labor productive." The good Mathurin was not content with making these reflections. He resolved to work by the day, and to save something from his wages to buy a spade and a sack of corn ; without which things, he must give up his fine agricultural projects. He acted so well, was so active and steady, that he soon saw himself in pos- session of the wished-for sack of corn. "I shall take it to the mill," said he, " and then I shall have enough to live upon till my field is covered with a rich harvest." Just as he was starting, Jerome came to borrow his treasure of him. " If you will lend me this sack of corn," said Jerome, " you will do me a great service ; for I have some very lucra- tive work in view, which I cannot possibly under- take, for want of provisions to live upon until it is finished." "I was in the same case," answered Mathurin, " and if I have now secured bread for 368 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. several months, it is at the expense of my arms and my stomach. Upon what principle of justice can it be devoted to the realization of your enter- prise instead of minef You may well believe that the bargain was a long one. However, it was finished at length, and on these conditions : First. Jerome promised to give back, at the end of the year, a sack of corn of the same quality, and of the same weighty without missing a single grain. " This first clause is perfectly just," said he, " for without it Mathurin would give, and not fend" Secondly. He engaged to deliver five litres on every hectolitre. " This clause is no less just than the other," thought he ; " for without it Mathurin would do me a service without compensation; he would inflict upon himself a privation — he would renounce his cherished enterprise — he would enable me to accomplish mine — he would cause me to enjoy for a year the fruits of his savings, and all this gratuitously. Since he delays the cultivation of his land, since he enables me to realize a lucra- tive labor, it is quite natural that I should let him partake, in a certain proportion, of the profits wtich I shall gain by the sacrifice he makes of his own." On his side, Mathurin, who was something of a scholar, made this calculation : " Smice, by virtue of the first clause, the sack of corn will return tq CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 369 me at the end of a year," be said to himself, "I shall be able to lend it again ; it will return to mc at the end of the second year ; I may lend it again, and so on, to all eternity. However, I cannot deny that it will have been eaten long ago. It is singular that I should be perpetually the owner of a sack of corn, although the one I have lent has been con- sumed for ever. But this is explained thus : It will be consumed in the service of Jerome. It will put it into the power of Jerome to produce a supe- rior value ; and, consequent!}', Jerome will be able to restore me a sack of corn, or the value of it, without having suffered the slightest injury ; but quite the contrary. And as regards myself, this value ought to be my property, as long as I do not consume it myself; if I had used it to clear my land, I should have received it again in the form of a fine harvest. Instead of that, I lend it, and shall recover it in the form of repayment. " From the second clause, I gain another piece of information. At the end of the year, I shall be in possession of five litres of corn, over the 100 that I have just lent. If, then, I were to continue to work by the day, and to save a part of my wages, as I have been doing, in the course of time I should be able to lend two sacks of corn ; then three ; then four ; and when I should have gained a sufficient number to enable me to live on these additions of five litres over and above each, I shall be at liberty 33 870 CAPITAL AND INTEREST! to take a little repose in my old age. But how is this? In this case, shall I not be living at the expense of others ? No, certainly, for it has been proved that in lending I perform a service ; I com- plete the labor of my borrowers ; and only deduct a trifling part of the excess of production, due to my lendings and savings. It is a marvellous thing, that a man may thus realize a leisure which injures no one, and for which he cannot be envied without injustice." THE HOUSE. Mondor had a house. In building it, he had extorted nothing from any one whatever. He owed it to his own personal labor, or, which is the same thing, to labor justly rewarded. His first care was to make a bargain with an architect, in virtue of which, by means of a hundred crowns a year, the latter engaged to keep the house in con- stant good repair. Mondor wa? already congratu- lating himself on the happy di.ys which he hoped to spend in this retreat, declared sacred by our Constitution. But Valerius wished to make it his residence. " How can you think of such a thing ?" said Mondor ; " it is I who have built it ; it has cost me ten years of painful labor, and now you would enjoy it !" They agreed to refer the matter to judges. They chose no profound economists — there were none such in the country. But they found CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 871 some just and sensible men; it all comes to the same thing: political economy, justice, good sense, are all the same thing. Now here is the decision made by the judges : If Yalerius wishes to occupy Mondor's house for a year, he is bound to submit to three conditions. The first is, to quit at the end of the year, and to restore the house in good repair, saving the inevitable decay resulting from mere duration. The second, to refund to Mondor the 300 francs, which the latter ' pays annually to the architect to repair the injuries of time ; for these injuries taking place whilst the house is in the ser- vice of Yalerius, it is perfectly just that he should bear the consequences. The third, that he should render to Mondor a service equivalent to that which 'he receives. As to this equivalence of services, it must be freely discussed between Mondor and Valerius. THE PLANE. A very long time ago there lived, in a poor vil- lage, a joiner, who was a philosopher, as all my heroes are, in their way. James worked from morning till night with his two strong arms, but his brain was not idle, for all that. He was fond of' reviewing his actions, their causes, and their effects. He sometimes said to himself, " "With my hatchet, my saw, and my hammer, I can make only coarse furniture, and can only get the pay for such. 872 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. If I only had a plane, I should please my custom- ers more, and they would pay me more. It is quite just ; I can only expect services proportioned to those which I render myself. Yes ! I ani resolved, I will make myself a, plane." However, just as he was setting to work, James reflected further : " I work for my customers 300 days in the year. If I give ten to making my plane, supposing it lasts me a year, only 290 days will remain for me to make my furniture. Now, in order that I be not the loser in this matter, I must gain henceforth, with the help of the plane, as much in 290 days, as I now do in 300. I must even gain more ; for unless I do so, it would not be woi"th my while to venture upon any innovations." James began to calculate. He satisfied himself that he should sell his finished furniture at a price which would amply compensate for the ten days devoted to the plane ; and when no doubt remained on this point, he set to work. I beg the reader to remark, that the power which exists in the tool to increase the productiveness of labor, is the basis of the solution which follows. At the end of ten days, James had in his pos- session an admirable plane, whi6h he valued all the more for having made it himself He danced for joy — for, like the girl with her basket of eggs, he reckoned all the profits which he expected to derive from the ingenious instrument ; but more fortunate CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 373 than she, he was not reduced to the necessity of saying good-bye to calf, cow, pig, and eggs, together. He was building his fine castles in the air, when he was interrupted by his acquaintance William, a joiner in the neighboring village. William having admired the plane, was struck with the advantages which might be gained from it. He said to James : W. You must do me a service. J. What service ? W. Lend me the plane for a year. As might be expected, James at this proposal did not fail to cry out, " How can you think of such a thing, William ? Well, if I do you this service, what will: you do for me in return ?" W. Nothing. Don't you know that a loan ought to be gratuitous ? Don't you know that capital is naturally unproductive ? Don't you know fraternity has been proclaimed? If you only do me a service for the sake of receiving one from me in return, what merit would you have ? J. William, my friend, fraternity does not mean that all the sacrifices are to be on one side ; if so, I do not see why they should not be on yours. Whether a loan should be gratuitous I don't know; but I do know that if I were to lend you my plane for a year, it would be giving it to you. To tell you the truth, that is not what I made it for. W, Well, we will say nothing about the modem 374 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. maxims discovered by the Socialist gentlemen. I ask you to do me a service ; what service do yoa ask of me in return ? J. First, then, in a year, the plane will be clone for, it will be good for nothing. It is only just, that you should let me have another exactly like it ; or that you should give me money enough to get it repaired ; or that you should supply me the ten days which I must devote to replacing it. W. This is perfectly just. I submit to these conditions. I engage to return it, or to let you .have one like it, or the value of the same. I think you must be satisfied with this, and can require nothing further. J. I think otherwise. I made the plane for myself, and not for you. I expected to gain some advantage from it, by my work being better finished and better paid, by an improvement in my condi- tion. What reason is there that I should make the plane, and you should gain the profit? I might as well ask you to give me your saw and hatchet ! What a confusion ! Is it not natural that each should keep what he has made with his own hands, as well as his hands themselves ? To use without recompense the hands of another, I call slavery ; to use without recompense the plane of another, can this be called fraternity ? W. But, then, I have agreed to return it to you sit the end of a year, as well polished and as sharp aa it is now. CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 375 J. We have nothing to do with next year ; we are speaking of this year. I have made the plane for the sake of improving my work_ and my condi- tion ; if you merely return it to me in a year, it is jrou who will gain the profit of it during the whole of that time. I am not bound to do you such a service without receiving anything from you in return ; therefore, if you wish for my plane, inde- pendently of the entire restoration already bar- gained for, you must do me a service which we will now discuss ; you must grant me remuneration. And this was done thus: William granted a remuneration calculated in such a way that, at the end of the year, James received his plane quite new, and in addition, a compensation, consisting of a new plank, for the advantages of which he had deprived himself, and which he had yielded to his friend. It was impossible for any one acquainted with the transaction to discover the slightest trace in it of oppression or injustice. The singular part of it is, that, at the end of the year, the plane came into James' possession, and he lent it again ; recovered it, and lent it a third and fourth time. It has passed into the hands of his son, who still lends it. Poor plane ! how many times has it changed, sometimes its blade, some- times its handle. It is no longer the same plane, but it has always the same value, at least for James' 376 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. posterity. "Workmen ! let us examine into these little stories. I maintain, first of all, that the sack of com and the plane are here the type, the model, a faithful representation, the symbol, of all capital ; as the five litres of corn and the plank are the type, the model, the representation, the symbol, of all inter- est. This granted, the following are, it seems to me, a series of consequences, the justice of which it is impossible to dispute. 1st. If the yielding of a plank by the borrower to the lender is a natural, equitable, lawful remu- neration, the just price of a real service, we may conclude that, as a general rule, it is in the nature of capital to produce interest. When this capital, as in the foregoing examples, takes the form of an instrument of labor, it is clear enough that it ought to bring an advantage to its possessor, to him who has devoted to it his time, his brains, and his strength. Otherwise, why should he have made it? No necessity of life can be immediately satisfied with instruments of labor; no one eats planes or drinks saws, except, indeed, he be a con- jurer. If a man determines to spend his time in the production of such things, he must have been led to it by the consideration of the power which these instruments add to his power ; of the time which they save him ; of the perfection and rapidity which they give to his labor ; in a word, of the advan- CAPITAL AND INTEREST, 377 tages which they procure for him. Now, these advantages, which have been prepared by labor, by the sacrifice of time -which might liave been used in a more immediate manner, are we bound, as soon as they are ready to be enjoyed, to confer them gratuitously upon another? Would it be an advance in social order, if the law decided thus, and citizens should pay officials , for causing such a law to be executed by force ? I venture to say, that there is not one amongst j'ou who would support it. It would be to legalize, to organize, to systematize injustice itself, for it would be proclaim- ing that there are men born to render, and others born to receive, gratuitous services. Granted, then, that interest is just, natural, and lawful. 2nd. A second consequence, not less remarkable than the former, and, if possible, still more conclu- sive, to which I call your attention, is this : interest is not injurioxis to the borrower. I mean to say, the obligation in which the borrower finds himself, to pay a remuneration for the use of capital, cannot do any harm to his condition. Observe, in fact, that James and William are perfectly free, as regards the transaction to which the plane gave occasion. The transaction cannot be accomplished without the consent of the one as well as of the other. The worst which can happen is, that James may be too exacting ; and in. this case, William, refusing the loan, remains as he was befora By 378 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. the fact of liis agreeing to borrow, he proves that he considers it an advantage to himself; he proves, that after every calculation, including the remune- ration, whatever it may be, required of him, he still, finds it more profitable to borrow than not to borrow. He only determines to do so because he has compared the inconveniences with the advan- tages. He has calculated that the day on which he returns the plane, accompanied by the xemunera- tion agreed upon, he will have effected more work, with the same labor, thanks to this tool. A profit will remain to him, otherwise he would not have borrowed. The two services of which we are speak- ing are exchanged according to the law which governs all exchanges, the law of supply and de- mand. The claims of James have a natural and impassable limit This is the point in which the remuneration demanded by him would absorb all the advantage which William might find in making use of a plane. In this case, the borrowing would not take place. "William would be bound either to make a plane for himself, or to do without one, which would leave him in his original condition. He borrows, because he gains by borrowing. I know very well what will be told me. You will say, William may be deceived, or, perhaps, he may be governed by necessity, and be obliged to submit to a harsh law. It may bo so. As to errors in calculation, they CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 379 belong to the infirmity of our nature, and to argue from this against the transaction in question, is objecting the possibility of loss in all imaginable transactions, in every human act. Error is an acci- dental fact, which is incessantly remedied by expe- rience. In short, everybody must guard against it. As far as those hard necessities are concerned, ■which force persons to burdensome borrowings, it is clear that these necessities exist previously to the borrowing. If William is in a situation in which he cannot possibly do without a plane, and must borrow one at any price, does this situation result from James having taken the trouble to make the tool ? Does it not exist independently of this circumstance? However harsh, however severe James may be," he will never render the sup- posed condition of William worse than it is. Morally, it is true, the lender will be to blame ; but, in an economical point of view, the loan itself can never be considered responsible for previous necessities, which it has not created, and which it relieves, to a certain extent. But this proves something to which I shall return. The evident interests of William, repre- senting here the borrowers, there are many Jameses and planes. In other words, lenders and capitals. It is very evident, that if William can say to James — " Your demands are exorbitant ; there is no lack of planes in the world ;" he will be in & 380 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. better situation than if James' plane was the only one to be borrowed. Assuredly, there is no maxim more true than this — service for service. But let us not forget, that no service has a fixed and abso- lute value, compared with others. The contracting parties are free. Each carries his requisitions to the farthest possible point ; and the most favorable circumstance for these requisitions is the absence of rivalship. Hence it follows, that if there is a class of men more interested than any other, in the formation, multiplication, and abundance of capitals, it is mainly that of the borrowers. Now, since capitals can only be formed and increased by the stimulus and the prospect of remuneration, let this class understand the injury they are inflicting on themselves, when they deny the lawfulness of interest, when they proclaim that credit should be gratuitous, when they declaim against the pre- tended tyranny of capital, when they discourage saving, thus forcing capitals to become scarce, and consequently interests to rise. 3rd. The anecdote I have just related enables you to explain this apparently singular phenome- non, which is termed the duration or perpetuity of interest. Since, in lending his plane, James has been able, very lawfully, to make it a condition that it should be returned to him, at the end of a year, in the same state in which it was when he lent it, is it not evident that he may, at the expira- CAPITAL AND INTEHEST. 381 tion of the term, lend it again on the same condi- tions. If he resolves upon the latter plan, the plane will return to him at the end of every year, and that without end. James will then be in a condition to lend it without end ; that is, he may derive from it a perpetual interest It will be said, that the plane will Be worn out. That is true ; but it will be worn out by the hand and for the profit of the borrower. The latter has taken into account this gradual wear, and taken upon himself, as he ought, the consequences. He has reckoned that he shall derive from this tool an advantage, which will allow him to restore it in its original condition, after having realized a profit from it. As long as James does not use this capital himself, or for his own advantage — as long as he renounces the advan- tages which allow it to be restored to its original condition — he will have an incontestable right to have it restored, and that independently of interest. Observe, besides, that if, as I believe I have shown, James, far from doing any harm to William, has done him a service in lending him his plane for a year ; for the same reason, he will do no harm to a second, a third, a fourth borrower, in the subse- quent periods. Hence you may understand, that the interest of a capital is as natural, as lawful, as useful, in the thousandth year, as in the first. We may go still further. It may happen, that James lends more than a single plane. It is possible, 382 CAPIX.iL AND INTEREST. that by means of working, of saving, of privations, of order, of activity, he may come to lend a multi- tude of planes and saws ; that is to say, to do a multitude of services. I insist upon this point — that if the first loan has been a social good, it will be the same with all the others ; for they are all simi- lar, and based upon the same principle. It may happen, then, that the amount of all the remune- rations received by our honest operative, in ex- change for services rendered by him, may suffice to maintain him. In this case, there will be a man in the world who has a right to live without work- ing. 1 do not say that he would be doing right to give himself up to idleness — but I say, that he has a right to do so ;. and if he does so, it will be at nobody's expense, but quite the contrarj-. If society at all understands the nature of things, it will acknowledge that this man subsists on services which he receives certainly (as we all do), but which he lawfully receives in exchange for other services, which he himself has rendered, that he continues to render, and which are quite real, inas- much as they are freely and voluntarily accepted. And here we have a glimpse of one oi the finest harmonies in the social world. I allude to leisure: not that leisure that the warlike and tyrannical classes arrange for themselves by the plunder of the workers, but that leisure which is the lawful and innocent fruit of past activity and economy. CAPITAL AND INTEEEST. 383 In expressing myself thus, I know that I shall shock many received ideas. But see! Is not leisure an essential spring in the social machine ? Without it, the world would never have had a Newton, a Pascal, a Fenelon ; mankind would have been ignorant of all arts, sciences, and of those wonderful inventions, prepared originally by inves- tigations of mere curiosity ; thought would have been inert — inan would have made no progress. On the other hand, if leisure could only be explained by plunder and oppression — if it were a benefit which could only be enjoyed unjustly, and at the expense of others, there would be no middle path between these two evils ; either mankind would be reduced to the necessity of stagnating in a vegeta- ble and stationary life, in eternal ignorance, from the absence of wheels to its machine — or else it would have to acquire these wheels at the price of inevitable injustice, and would necessarily present the sad spectacle, in one form or other, of the antique classification of human beings into Masters and Slaves. I defy any one to show me, in this case, any other alternative. We should be com- pelled to contemplate the Divine plan which gov- erns society, with the regret of thinking that it presents a 'deplorable chasm. The stimulus of progress would be forgotten, or, which is worse, this stimulus would be no other than injustice itsel£ But, no ! God has not left such a chasm in hi-s 384 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. work of love. We must take care not to disregard his wisdom and power ; for those whose imper- fect meditations cannot explain the lawfulness of leisure, are very much like the astronomer who said, at a certain point in the heavens there ought to exist a planet which will be at last discovered, for without it the celestial world is not harmony, but discord. Well, I say that, if well understood, the history of my humble plane, although very modest, is suffi- cient to raise us to the contemplation of one of the most consoling, but least understood, of the social harmonies. It is not true that we must choose between the denial or the unlawfulness of leisure ; thanks to rent and its natural duration, leisure may arise from labor and saving. It is a pleasing prospect, which every one may have in view ; a noble recom- pense, to which each may aspira It makes its appearance in the world ; it distributes itself pro- portionably to the exercise of certain virtues ; it opens all the avenues to intelligence ; it ennobles, it raises the morals ; it spiritualizes the soul of human- ity, not only without laying any weight on those of our brethren whose lot in life devotes them to severe labor, but relieving them gradually from the heaviest and most repugnant part of this labor. It is enough that capitals should be formed, accu- mulated, multiplied ; should be lent on conditions CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 385 less and less burdensome ; ttat they sliould descend, penetrate into every social circle, and that, by an admirable progression, after having liberated the lenders, they should hasten the liberation of the borrowers themselves. For that end, the laws and customs ought to be favorable to economy, the source of capital. It is enough to say, that the first of all these conditions is, not to alarm, to attack, to deny that which is the stimulus of saving and the reason of its existence — interest. As long as we see nothing passing from hand to hand, in the character of loan, but provisions, mate- rials, instruments, things indispensable to the pro- ductiveness of labor itself, the ideas thus far exhibited will not find many opponents. Who knows, even, that I may not be reproached for having made great effort to burst what may be said to be an open door. But as soon as cash makes its appearance as the subject of the transac- tion (and it is this which appears almost always), immediately a crowd of objections are raised. Money, it will be said, will not reproduce itself, like your sack of corn; it does not assist labor, like your plane ; it does not aflbrd an immediate satis- faction, like your house. It is incapable, by its nature, of producing interest, of multiplying itself, and the remuneration it demands is a positive extortion. Who cannot see the sophistry of this ? Who 34 386 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. does not see tliat cash is only a transient form, which men give at the time to other values, to rea^ objects of usefulness, for the sole object of facilita- ting their arrangements? In the midst of social complications, the man who is in a condition to lend, scarcely ever has the exact thing which the borrower wants. James, it is true, has a plane; but, perhaps, William wants a saw. They cannot negotiate ; the transaction favorable to both cannot take place, and then what happens ? It happens that James first exchanges his plane for money ; he lends the money to William, and William ex- changes the money for a saw. The transaction is no longer a simple one ; it is decomposed into two parts, as I explained above in speaking of exchange. But, for all that, it has not changed its nature ; it still contains all the elements of a direct loan. James has still got rid of a tool which was- useful to him ; William has still received an instru- ment which perfects his work and increases his pro- fits ; there is still a service rendered by the lender, which entitles him to receive an equivalent service from the borrower ; this just balance is not the less established by free mutual bargaining. The very natural obligation to restore at the end of the term the entire value, still constitutes the principle of the duration of interest. At the end of a year, says M. Thor^, will you find an additional crown in a bag of a hundred pounds ? CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 387 Iv'c, certainly, if tte borrower puts the bag of •crLe hu.adred pounds on the shelf. In such a case, neither the plane, nor the sack of corn, would .reproduce themselves. But it is not for the sake of leaving the money in the .bag, nor the plane on the hook,^ that they are borrowed. The plane is borrowed to be used, or the money to procure a plane. And if it Ig clearly proved that this tool enables the borrower to obtain profits which he would not ha-v^ made without it, if it is proved that the lender has renounced creating for himself this excess of profits, we may understand how the stipu- lation of a part of this excess of profits in favor of the lender, is equitable and lawful. Ignorance of the true part which cash plays in human transactions, is the source of the most fatal errors. I intend devoting an entire pamphlet to this subject. From what we may infer from the writings of M. Proudhon, that which has led him to think that gratuitous credit was a logical and definite consequence ' of social progress, is the observation of the phenomenon which shows a decreasing interest, almost in direct proportion to the rate of civilization. In barbarous times it is, in fact, cent, per cent, and more. Then it descends to eighty, sixty, fifty, forty, twenty, ten, eight, five, four, and three per cent. In Holland, it has even been as low as two per cent. Hence it is concluded, that "in proportion as society comes to perfection, 888 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. it will descend to zero by the time civilization is complete. In other words, that which character- izes social perfection is the gratuitousness of credit When, therefore, we shall have abolished interest, we shall have reached the last step of progress." This is mere sophistry, and as such false arguing may contribute to render popular the urtjust, dan- gerous, and destructive dogma, that credit should be gratuitous, by representing it as coincident with social perfection, with the reader's permission I will examine in a few words this new view of the ques- tion. What is interest ? It is the service rendered, after a free bargain, by the borrower to the lender, in remuneration for the service he has received by the loan. By what law is the rate of these remu- nerative services established ? By the general law which regulates the equivalent of all services ; that is, by the law of supply and demand. The more easily a thing is procured, the smaller is the service rendered by yielding it or lending it The man who gives me a glass of water in the Pyrenees, does not render me so great a service as he who allows me one in the desert of Sahara, If there are many planes, sacks of cdrn, or houses, in a country, the use of them is obtained, other things being equal, on more favorable conditions than if they were few ; for the simple reason, that the len- der renders in this case a smaller relative service. CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 389 It is not surprising, therefore, that the more abundant capitals are, the lower is the interest. Is this saying that it will ever reach zero ? No ; because, I repeat it, the principle of a remuneration is in the loan. To say that interest will be anni- hilated, is to say that there will never be any motive for saving, for denying ourselves, in order to form new capitals, nor even to preserve the old ones. In this case, the waste would immediately bring a void, and interest would directly reappear. In that, the nature of the services of which we are speaking does not differ from any other. Thanks to industrial progress, a pair of stockings, which used to be worth six francs, has successively been worth only four, three, and two. No one can say to what point this value will descend ; but we can affirm, that it will never reach zero, unless the stockings finish by producing themselves spentane- ously. Why ? Because the principle of remune- ration is in labor ; because he who works for another renders a service, and ought to receive a service. If no one paid for stockings, they would cease to be made ; and, with the scarcity, the price would not fail to reappear. The sophism which I am now combating has its root in the infinite divisibility which belongs to value, as it does to matter. It appears, at first, paradoxical, but it is well known to all mathematicians, that, through all eter- 390 CAPITAL AND INTEEEST. nity, fractions may be taken from a weight without the weight ever being annihilated. It is sufficient that each successive fraction be less than the preced- ing one, in a determined and regular proportion. jThere are countries where people apply them- selves to increasing the size of horses, or diminish- ing in sheep the size of the head. It is impossible to say precisely to what point they will arrive in this. No one can say that he has seen the largest horse or the smallest sheep's head that will ever appear in the world. But he may safely say that the size of horses will never attain to infinity', nor the heads of sheep to nothing. In the same way, no one can say to what point the price of stockings nor the interest of capitals will come down ; but we may safely affirm, when we know the nature of things, that neither the one nor the other will ever arrive at zero, for labor and capital can no more live without recompense than a sheep without a head. The arguments of M. Proudhon reduce them- selves, then, to this: since the most skillful agricul- turists are those who have reduced the heads of sheep to the smallest size, we shall have arrived at the highest agricultural perfection when sheep have no longer any heads. Therefore, in order to realize the perfection, let us behead them. CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 391 I have now done -with this wearisome discussion. Why is it that the breath of false doctrine has made it needful to examine into the intimate nature of interest? I must not leave off without remark- ing upon a beautiful moral which may be drawn from this law : " The depression of interest is pro- portioned to the abundance of capitals." This law being granted, if there is a class of men to whom it is more inaportant than to any other that capitals be formed, accumulate, multi];)ly, abound, and superabound, it is certainly the class which borrows them directly or indirectly ; .it is those men who operate upon materials, who gain assistance by instruments, who live upon provisions, produced and economized by other men. - Imagine, in a vast and fertih country, a popula- tion of a thousand inhabitants, destitute of all capital thus .defined. It will assuredly perish by the pangs of hunger. Let us suppose a case hardly less cruel. Let us suppose that ten of these savages are provided with instruments and provisions suffi- cient to work and to live themselves until harvest time, as well as to remunerate the services of eighty laborers. The inevitable result will be the death of nine hundred human beings. It is clear, then, that since nine hundred and ninety men, urged by want, will crowd upon the supports whicn would only maintain a hundred, tke ten capitalists will be mas-^ ters of the market. They will obtain labor on the 392 CAPIl'AL AND INTEREST. hardest conditions, for they will put it up to auction, or the highest bidder. And observe this — if these capitalists entertain such pious sentiments as would induce them to impose personal privations on them- selves, in order to diminish the sufferings of some of their brethren, this generosity, which attaches to morality, will be as noble in its principle as useful in its effects. But if, duped by that false philosophy which persons wish so inconsiderately to mingle with economic, laws, they take to remunerating labor largely, far from doing good, they will do harm. They will give double wages, it may ba But then, forty -five men will be better provided foY, whilst forty-five others will come to augment the number of those who are sinking into the grave. Upon this supposition, it is not the lowering of wages which is the mischief, it is the scarcity of capital. Low wages are not the cause, but the effect of the evil. I may add, that they are to a certain extent the remedy. It acts in this way ; it distributes the burden of suffering as much as it can, and saves as many lives as a limited quantity of sustenance permits. Suppose now, that instead of ten capitalists, there should be a hundred, two hundred, five hun- dred — is it not evident that the condition of the whole population, and, above all, that of the " pro- l^fjires/' * will be more and more improved ? la • Common people. CAPITAL AND INTKKEST. 393 it not evident that, apart frem every consideration of generosity, they would obtain more work and better pay for it ? — that they themselves will be m a better condition to form capitals, without being able to fix the limits to this ever-increasing facility of realizing equality and well-being ? Would it not be madness in them to admit such doctrines, and to act in a way which would drain the source of wages, and paralyze tlie activity and stimulus of saving ? Let them learn this lesson, then ; doubt- less, capitals are good for those who possess them : who denies it ? But the}' are also useful to those who have not yet been able to form them ; and it is important to those who have them not, that others should have them. Yes, if the '' proMtaires" knew their true inter- ests, they would seek, with the greatest care, what circumstances are, and what are not favorable to saving, in order to favor the former and to dis- courage the latter. They would sympathize with every measure which tends to the rapid formation of capitals. They would be enthusiastic promoters of peace, liberty, order, security, the union of classes and peoples, economy, moderation in public expenses, simplicity in the machinery of Govern- ment ; for it is under the sway of all these circum- stances that saving does its work, brings plenty within the reach of the masses, invites those per- sons to become the formeri of capital who were 35 394 CAPITAL AND INTEEEST: formerly under the necessity of borrowing upon hard conditions. They would repel with energy the warlike spirit, which diverts from its true coui-se so large a part of human labor ; the monopolizing spirit, which deranges the equitable distribution of riches, in the way by which liberty alone can realize it ; the multitude of public services, which attack our purses only to check our liberty ; and, in short, those subversive, hateful, thoughtless doctrines, which alarm capital, prevent its forma- tion, oblige it to flee, and finally to raise its price, to the special disadvantage of the workers, who bring it into operation. Well, and in this respect is not the revolution of February a hard lesson ? Is it not evident, that the insecurity it has thrown into the world of business, on the one hand ; and, on the other, the advancement of the fatal theories to which I have alluded, and which, from the clubs, have almost penetrated into the regions of. the Legislature, have everywhere i^ised the rate of interest? Is it not evident, that from that time the " proletaires'' have found greater difficulty in procuring those materials, instruments, and provi- sions, without which labor is impossible? Is it not that which has caused stoppages ; and do not stoppages, in their turn, lower wages ? Thus there is a deficiency of labor to the "proletaires," from the same cause which loads the objects they con- sume with an increase of price, in consequence of CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 895 the rise of interest High interest, low wages, means in other words that the same article preserves its price, but that the part of the capitalist has invaded, without profiting himself, that of the workman. A friend of mine, commissioned to make inquiry into Parisian industry, has assured me that the manufacturers have revealed to him a verj' striking fact, which proves, better than any reasoning can, how much insecurity and uncertainty injure the formation of capital. It was remarked, that during the most distressing period, the popular expenses of mere fancy had not diminished. The small theaters, the fighting lists, the public houses, and tobacco depots, were as much frequented as in prosperous times. In the inquiry, the operatives themselves explained this phenomenon thus : " What is the use of pinching ? "Who knows what will happen to us? Who knows that interest will not be abol- ished ? Who knows but that the State will become a universal and gratuitous lender, and that it -will wish to annihilate all the fruits which we might expect from our savings ?" Well ! I say, that if such ideas could prevail during two single years, it would be enough to turn our beautiful France into a Turkey — misery would become general and endemic, and, most- assuredly, the poor would be the first upon whom it would fall. Workmen ! They talk to you a great deal upon 396 CAPITAL AND IN-TEBEST. the artificial organization of labor ; — do you know why they do so ? Because they are ignorant of the laws of its natural organization ; that is, of the wonderful organization which results from 'liberty. You are told, that liberty gives rise to what is called the radical antagonism of classes ; that it creates, and makes to clash, two opposite interests — that of the capitalists and that of the " prole- taires." But we ought to begin by proving that this antagonism exists by a law of nature; and afterwards it would remain to be shown how far the an-angements of restraint are superior to those of liberty, for between liberty and restraint I see no middle path. Again, it would remain to be proved, that restraint would always operate to your advantage, and to the prejudice of the rich. But, no ; this radical antagonism, this natural opposi- tion of interests, does not exist. It is only an evil dream of perverted and intoxicated imaginations. No ; a plan so defective has not proceeded from the Divine Mind. To affirm it, we must begin by deny- ing the existence of God. And see how, bv means of social laws, and because men exchange amongst themselves their labors and their productions, see what a harmonious tie attaches the classes, one to the other ! There are the landowners ; what is their interest ? That the soil be fertile, and the sun beneficent: and what is the result? That corn ibounds, that it falls in price, and tlie advantage CAPITAL AND INTEREST. 897 turns to the profit of those who have had no patrimo- ny. There are the manufacturers ; what is their con- stant thought ? To perfect their labor, to increase the power of their machines, to procure for themselves, upon the best terms, the raw material. And to what does all this tend? To the abundance and low price of produce ; that is, that all the efforts of the manufacturers, and without their suspecting it, result in a profit to the public consumer, of which each of you is one. It is the same with every profession. Well, the capitalists are not exempt from this law. They are very busy mak- ing schemes, economizing, and turning them to their advantage. This is all very well; but the more they succeed, the more do they promote the abundance of capital, and, as a necessary conse- quence, the reduction of interest ? Now, who is it that profits by the reduction of interest ? Is it not the borrower first, and finally, the consumers of the things which the capitals contribute to produce? It is, therefore, certain that the final result of the efforts of each class, is the common good of all. You are told that capital tyrannizes over labor. I do not deny that each one endeavors to draw the greatest possible advantage from his situation ; but, in this sense, he realizes only that which is possible. Now, it is never^ more possible for capi- tals to tyrannize over labor, than when they are scarce ; for then it is they who make the law — it is 398 CAPITAL AND INTEREST. they who regulate the rate of sale. Never is this tyranny more impossible to them, than when they are abundant; for, in that case, it is labor which has the command. Away, then, with the jealousies of classes, ill- will, unfounded hatreds, unjust suspicions. These depraved passions injure those who nourish them in their hearts. This is no declamatory morality ; it is a chain of causes and eifects, which is capable of being rigorously, mathematically demonstrated. It is not the less sublime, in that it satisfies the intellect as well as the feelings. I shall sum up this whole dissertation with these words: "Workmen, laborers, " prol^taires," desti- tute and suffering classes, will you improve your condition ? You will not succeed by strife, insur- rection, hatred, and error. But there are three things which cannot perfect the entire community without extending these benefits to yourselves ; these things are — peace, liberty, and security. THE AMERICAN FREE -TRADE LEAGUE Holds That Every man should have the right to exchange the products of his labor, wherever he can obtain the most for it. That, He should be free to seek his own welfare in his own way, so long as he does not infringe the rights of others. That, So far as he is deprived of these rights, he is in slavery. It Recognizes The Importance and Dignity of Labor, because La- bor is the source of prosperity. It holds, therefore, that to tax the necessities of the laborer, with a view to benefit the manufacturing capitalist, is to strike a blow at the foundation of the country's pros- perity. It Holds That Every Country has its peculiar natural advantages, and that to produce what can be most easily produced in it, and to ex- change such products for what is more easily produced elsewhere, is the most profitable exertion of its industry. That, The true means of encouraging Home Industry and of lessening poverty, is to remove every obstacle to the free exchange of the pro- ducts of labor. It Holds That, " The Protective System," so-called, is only ignorant National selfishness, which defeats its own ends. That. It is contrary to the wise and beneficent laws of Providence. That, It diverts Capital and Labor from the most efficient occupations to others proved less eflficient by their need of artificial support. That, It is an odious form of class legislation. That, It is a fertile source of social, sectional, and international discord. That, It encourages commercial dishonesty and official corruption. It Holds That, Free-Trade with all the world will conduce to our high- est welfare, and is preeminently worthy of the American people, who should be foremost in breaking down every social and commercial barrier. The American Free-Tradk League submits to taxation and duties to meet the necessities of Government, but denounces as robbery and tyranny all taxation for the benefit of special classes. The League urges all who agree with these principles, to unite with it in obtaining emancipation for Industry and Commerce. OFFICE OF THE LEAQUE: No. 38 Burling Slip, Ne^v-York. ■Jh'^jilJ'S^iiIi:^iy!i.