第3章
Outoftheliberationoftheserfsrosethefirstlineamentsofthehierarchicalconstitutionofmodernindustryintheseparation
betweentheentrepreneursandtheworkers。Thepersonalenfranchisementofthelatter，stimulatingactivityanddeveloping
initiative，ledtoaccumulations，whichwerefurtherpromotedbytheestablishmentoforderandgoodgovernmentbythe
civiccorporationswhichgrewoutoftheenfranchisement。Thusanactivecapitalistclasscameintoexistence。Itappeared
firstincommerce，theinhabitantsofthetradingcitiesimportingexpensiveluxuriesfromforeigncountries，ortheimproved
manufacturesofrichercommunities，forwhichthegreatproprietorsgladlyexchangedtherawproduceoftheirlands。In
performingtheofficeofcarriers，too，betweendifferentcountries，thesecitieshadanincreasingfieldforcommercial
enterprise。Atalaterperiod，asAdamSmithhasshown，commercepromotedthegrowthofmanufactures，whichwereeither
producedforforeignsale，ormadefromforeignmaterials，orimitatedfromtheworkofforeignartificers。Butthefirst
importantdevelopmentofhandicraftsinmodernEuropebelongstothefourteenthandfifteenthcenturies，andtheriseof
manufacturingentrepreneursisnotconspicuouswithintheMiddleAgesproperlysocalled。Agriculture，ofcourse，lags
behind;thoughthefeudallordstendtotransformthemselvesintodirectorsofagriculturalenterprise，theirhabitsand
prejudicesretardsuchamovement，andtheadvanceofruralindustryproceedsslowly。Itdoes，however，proceed，partlyby
thestimulationarisingfromthedesiretoprocurethefinerobjectsofmanufactureimportedfromabroadorproducedby
increasedskillathome，partlybytheexpenditureonthelandofcapitalamassedintheprosecutionofurbanindustries。
Someofthetradecorporationsinthecitiesappeartohavebeenofgreatantiquity，。butitwasinthethirteenthcenturythat
theyrosetoimportancebybeinglegallyrecognisedandregulated。Thesecorporationshavebeenmuchtooabsolutely
condemnedbymostoftheeconomists，whoinsistonapplyingtotheMiddleAgestheideasoftheeighteenthandnineteenth
centuries。Theywere，itistrue，unfittedformoderntimes，anditwasnecessarythattheyshoulddisappear;theirexistence
indeedwasquiteundulyprolonged。Buttheywereatfirstinseveralrespectshighlybeneficial。Theywereavaluable
rallying—pointforthenewindustrialforces，whichwerestrengthenedbytheriseoftheespritdecorpswhichtheyfostered。
Theyimprovedtechnicalskillbytheprecautionswhichweretakenforthesolidityandfinishedexecutionofthewares
producedineachlocality，anditwaswithaviewtotheadvancementoftheindustrialartsthatSt。Louisundertookthe
betterorganizationofthetradesofParis。Thecorporationsalsoencouragedgoodmoralhabitsthroughthesortof
spontaneoussurveillancewhichtheyexercised，andtheytendedtodevelopthesocialsentimentwithinthelimitsofeach
profession，intimeswhenalargerpublicspiritcouldscarcelyyetbelookedfor。（3）
NOTES:
1。Roscher，GeschichtederN。O。inDeutschland，pp。5，sqq。
2。OnthisquestionseeJourdain，PhilosophiedeS。Thomas，vol。1，pp。141—9，and400。
3。FurtherinformationontheEconomicLiteratureoftheMiddleAgeswillbefoundinH。Contzen，Geschichteder
VolkswirthschaftlichenLiteraturinMittelalter（2ded。1872），andV。Cusumano，Dell’EconomiaPoliticanelMedio—evo（1876）。SeealsoW。J。Ashley，IntroductiontoEnglishEconomicHistoryandTheory（1888），vol。i，chap。iii。
Chapter4
ModernTimes:FirstandSecondPhasesThecloseoftheMiddleAges，asComtehasshown，mustbeplacedattheend，notofthefifteenthbutofthethirteenth
century。Themodernperiod，whichthenbegan，isfilledbyadevelopmentexhibitingthreesuccessivephases，andissuingin
thestateofthingswhichcharacterisesourownepoch。
I。DuringthefourteenthandfifteenthcenturiestheCatholico—feudalsystemwasbreakingdownbythemutualconflictsofits
ownofficialmembers，whilsttheconstituentelementsofaneworderwererisingbeneathit。Onthepracticalsidethe
antagonistsmatchedagainsteachotherwerethecrownandthefeudalchiefs;andtheserivalpowerssoughttostrengthen
themselvesbyformingallianceswiththetownsandtheindustrialforcestheyrepresented。Themovementsofthisphasecan
scarcelybesaidtofindanechoinanycontemporaryeconomicliterature。
II。Inthesecondphaseofthemodernperiod，whichopenswiththebeginningofthesixteenthcentury，thespontaneous
collapseofthemedievalstructureisfollowedbyaseriesofsystematicassaultswhichstillfurtherdisorganizeit。Duringthis
phasethecentraltemporalpower，whichhasmadeagreatadvanceinstabilityandresources，laysholdoftherisingelements
ofmanufacturesandcommerce，andseeks，whilstsatisfyingthepopularenthusiasmfortheirpromotion，tousethemfor
politicalends，andmakethemsubserveitsownstrengthandsplendourbyfurnishingthetreasurenecessaryformilitary
success。Withthispracticaleffort，andthesocialtendenciesonwhichitrests，theMercantileschoolofpoliticaleconomy，
whichthenobtainsaspontaneousascendency，isincloserelation。Whilstpartiallysucceedinginthepolicywehave
indicated，theEuropeanGovernmentsyetonthewholenecessarilyfail，theiroriginandnaturedisqualifyingthemforthetask
ofguidingtheindustrialmovement;andthediscreditofthespiritualpower，withwhichmostofthemareconfederate，
furtherweakensandunderminesthem。
III。Inthelastphase，whichcoincidesapproximatelywiththeeighteenthcentury，thetendencytoacompletelynewsystem，
bothtemporalandspiritual，becomesdecisivelypronounced，firstinthephilosophyandgeneralliteratureoftheperiod，and
theninthegreatFrenchexplosion。Theuniversalcriticaldoctrine，whichhadbeenannouncedbytheProtestantismofthe
previousphase，andsystematisedinEnglandtowardsthecloseofthatphase，ispropagatedandpopularised，especiallyby
Frenchwriters。Thespiritofindividualisminherentinthedoctrinewaseminentlyadaptedtothewantsofthetime，andthe
generalfavourwithwhichthedogmasofthesocialcontractandlaisserfairewerereceivedindicatedajustsentimentofthe
conditionspropertothecontemporarysituationofEuropeansocieties。Solongasanewcoherentsystemofthoughtandlife
couldnotbeintroduced，whatwastobedesiredwasalargeandactivedevelopmentofpersonalenergyundernofurther
controloftheoldsocialpowersthanwouldsufficetopreventanarchy。Governmentswerethereforerightlycalledonto
abandonanyeffectivedirectionofthesocialmovement，and，asfaraspossible，torestricttheirinterventiontothe
maintenanceofmaterialorder。Thispolicywas，fromitsnature，oftemporaryapplicationonly;butthenegativeschool，
accordingtoitsordinaryspirit，erectedwhatwasmerelyatransitoryandexceptionalnecessityintoapermanentandnormal
law。TheunanimousEuropeanmovementtowardstheliberationofeffort，whichsometimesrosetotheheightofapublic
passion，hadvarioussides，correspondingtothedifferentaspectsofthoughtandlife;andoftheeconomicsidetheFrench
physiocratswerethefirsttheoreticrepresentativesonthelargescale，thoughtheofficetheyundertookwas，bothinits
destructiveandorganicprovinces，morethoroughlyandeffectivelydonebyAdamSmith，whooughttoberegardedas
continuingandcompletingtheirwork。
Itmustbeadmittedthatwiththewholemodernmovementseriousmoralevilswerealmostnecessarilyconnected。The
generaldisciplinewhichtheMiddleAgeshadsoughttoinstituteandhadpartiallysucceededinestablishing，thoughon
precariousbases，havingbrokendown，thesentimentofdutywasweakenedalongwiththespiritofensemblewhichisits
naturalally，andindividualismindoctrinetendedtoencourageegoisminaction。Intheeconomicfieldthisresultisspecially
conspicuous。Nationalselfishnessandprivatecupidityincreasinglydominate;andthehigherandlowerindustrialclassestend
toseparationandeventomutualhostility。Thenewelements——scienceandindustry——whichweregraduallyacquiring
ascendencyboreindeedintheirbosomanultimatedisciplinemoreefficaciousandstablethanthatwhichhadbeendissolved;
butthefinalsynthesiswaslongtooremote，andtooindeterminateinitsnature，tobeseenthroughthedispersiveand
seeminglyincoherentgrowthofthoseelements。Now，however，thatsynthesisisbecomingappreciable;anditistheeffort
towardsit，andtowardsthepracticalsystemtobefoundedonit，thatgivesitspeculiarcharactertotheperiodinwhichwe
live。Andtothisspontaneousnisusofsocietycorresponds，asweshallsee，anewformofeconomicdoctrine，inwhichit
tendstobeabsorbedintogeneralsociologyandsubordinatedtomorals。
Itwillbetheobjectofthefollowingpagestoverifyandillustrateindetailtheschemeherebroadlyindicated，andtopoint
outthemannerinwhichtherespectivefeaturesoftheseveralsuccessivemodernphasesfindtheircounterpartandreflection
inthehistoricaldevelopmentofeconomicspeculation。
FIRSTMODERNPHASE
Thefirstphasewasmarked，ontheonehand，bythespontaneousdecompositionofthemedievalsystem，and，ontheother，
bytheriseofseveralimportantelementsoftheneworder。Thespiritualpowerbecamelessaptaswellaslessabletofulfil
itsmoraloffice，andthesocialmovementwasmoreandmorelefttotheirregularimpulsesofindividualenergy，often
enlistedintheserviceofambitionandcupidity。StrongGovernmentswereformed，whichservedtomaintainmaterialorder
amidstthegrowingintellectualandmoraldisorder。Theuniversaladmissionofthecommonsasanelementinthepolitical
systemshowedthegrowingstrengthoftheindustrialforces，asdidalsoinanotherwaytheinsurrectionsoftheworking
classes。Thedecisiveprevalenceofpeacefulactivitywasindicatedbytheriseoftheinstitutionofpaidarmies——atfirst
temporary，afterwardspermanent——whichpreventedtheinterruptionordistractionoflabourbydevotingadeterminate
minorityofthepopulationtomartialoperationsandexercises。Manufacturesbecameincreasinglyimportant;andinthis
branchofindustrythedistinctionbetweentheentrepreneurandtheworkerswasfirstfirmlyestablished，whilstfixed
relationsbetweentheseweremadepossiblebytherestrictionofmilitarytrainingandservicetoaspecialprofession。
Navigationwasfacilitatedbytheuseofthemariner’scompass。Theartofprintingshowedhowtheintellectualmovement
andtheindustrialdevelopmentweredestinedtobebroughtintorelationwitheachotherandtoworktowardscommon
ends。PubliccreditroseinFlorence，Venice，andGenoalongbeforeHollandandEnglandattainedanygreatfinancial
importance。Justatthecloseofthephase，thediscoveryofAmericaandofthenewroutetotheEast，whilstrevolutionising
thecourseoftrade，preparedthewayfortheestablishmentofcolonies，whichcontributedpowerfullytothegrowing
preponderanceofindustriallife，andpointedtoitsultimateuniversality。
Itisdoubtlessduetotheequivocalnatureofthisstage，standingbetweenthemedievalandthefullycharacterisedmodern
period，thatonthetheoreticsidewefindnothingcorrespondingtosuchmarvellouspracticalfermentandexpansion。The
generalpoliticaldoctrineofAquinaswasretained，withmerelysubordinatemodifications。Theonlyspecialeconomic
questionwhichseemstohavereceivedparticularattentionwasthatofthenatureandfunctionsofmoney，theimportanceof
whichbegantobefeltaspaymentsinserviceorinkindwerediscontinued，andregularsystemsoftaxationbegantobe
introduced。
Roscher（1）andafterhimWolowski，havecalledattention，toNicoleOresme，whowasteacherofCharlesV，KingofFrance，
anddiedBishopofLisieuxin1382。Roscherpronounceshimagreateconomist。（2）HisTractatusdeOrigine，Natura，Jure，
etMutationibusMonetarum（reprintedbyWolowski，1864）containsatheoryofmoneywhichisalmostentirelycorrect
accordingtotheviewsofthenineteenthcentury，andisstatedwithsuchbrevity，clearness，andsimplicityoflanguageas
showtheworktobefromthehandofamaster。
SECONDMODERNPHASE:MERCANTILESYSTEM
Throughoutthefirstmodernphasetheriseofthenewsocialforceshadbeenessentiallyspontaneous;inthesecondthey
becametheobjectofsystematicencouragementonthepartofGovernments，which，nowthatthefinancialmethodsofthe
MiddleAgesnolongersufficed，couldnotfurthertheirmilitaryandpoliticalendsbyanyothermeansthanincreased
taxation，implyingaugmentedwealthofthecommunity。IndustrythusbecameapermanentinterestofEuropean
Governments，andeventendedtobecometheprincipalobjectoftheirpolicy。Innaturalharmonywiththisstateoffacts，the
mercantilesystemaroseandgrew，attainingitshighestdevelopmentaboutthemiddleoftheseventeenthcentury。
TheMercantiledoctrine，statedinitsmostextremeform，makeswealthandmoneyidentical，andregardsitthereforeasthe
greatobjectofacommunitysotoconductitsdealingswithothernationsastoattracttoitselfthelargestpossibleshareof
thepreciousmetals。Eachcountrymustseektoexporttheutmostpossiblequantityofitsownmanufacturesandtoimportas
littleaspossibleofthoseofothercountries，receivingthedifferenceofthetwovaluesingoldandsilver。Thisdifferenceis
calledthebalanceoftrade，andthebalanceisfavourablewhenmoremoneyisreceivedthanispaid。Governmentsmust
resorttoallavailableexpedients——prohibitionof，orhighdutieson，theimportationofforeignwares，bountiesontheexport
ofhomemanufactures，restrictionsontheexportofthepreciousmetals——forthepurposeofsecuringsuchabalance。
Butthisstatementofthedoctrine，thoughcurrentinthetext—books，doesnotrepresentcorrectlytheviewsofallwhomust
beclassedasbelongingtotheMercantileschool。Manyofthemembersofthatschoolweremuchtooclear—sightedto
entertainthebelief，whichthemodernstudentfeelsdifficultyinsupposinganyclassofthinkerstohaveprofessed，that
wealthconsistsexclusivelyofgoldandsilver。Themercantilistsmaybebestdescribed，asRoscher（3）hasremarked，notby
anydefiniteeconomictheoremwhichtheyheldincommon，butbyasetoftheoretictendencies，commonlyfoundin
combination，thoughseverallyprevailingindifferentdegreesindifferentminds。Thesetendenciesmaybeenumeratedas
follows:（1）Towardsover—estimatingtheimportanceofpossessingalargeamountofthepreciousmetals;（2）towardsan
undueexaltation（a）offoreigntradeoverdomestic，and（b）oftheindustrywhichworksupmaterialsoverthatwhich
providesthem;（3）towardsattachingtoohighavaluetoadensepopulationasanelementofnationalstrength;and（4）
towardsinvokingtheactionofthestateinfurtheringartificiallytheattainmentoftheseveralendsthusproposedas
desirable。
IfweconsiderthecontemporarypositionofaffairsinWesternEurope，weshallhavenodifficultyinunderstandinghow
thesetendencieswouldinevitablyarise。ThediscoveriesintheNewWorldhadledtoalargedevelopmentoftheEuropean
currencies。Theoldfeudaleconomyfoundedprincipallyondealingsinkind，hadgivenwaybeforethenew"money
economy，"andthedimensionsofthelatterwereeverywhereexpanding。Circulationwasbecomingmorerapid，distant
communicationsmorefrequent，citylifeandmovablepropertymoreimportant。Themercantilistswereimpressedbythefact
thatmoneyiswealthsuigeneris，thatitisatalltimesinuniversaldemand，andthatitputsintothehandsofitspossessorthe
powerofacquiringallothercommodities。Theperiod，again，wasmarkedbytheformationofgreatstates，withpowerful
Governmentsattheirhead。TheseGovernmentsrequiredmenandmoneyforthemaintenanceofpermanentarmies，which，
especiallyforthereligiousandItalianwars，werekeptuponagreatscale，Courtexpenses，too，weremorelavishthanever
before，andalargernumberofcivilofficialswasemployed。Theroyaldomainsanddueswereinsufficienttomeetthese
requirements，andtaxationgrewwiththedemandsofthemonarchies。Statesmensawthatfortheirownpoliticalends
industrymustflourish。Butmanufacturesmakepossibleadenserpopulationandahighertotalvalueofexportsthan
agriculture;theyopenalesslimitedandmorepromptlyextensiblefieldtoenterprise。Hencetheybecametheobjectof
specialGovernmentalfavourandpatronage，whilstagriculturefellcomparativelyintothebackground。Thegrowthof
manufacturesreactedoncommerce，towhichanewandmightyarenahadbeenopenedbytheestablishmentofcolonies。
Thesewereviewedsimplyasestatestobeworkedfortheadvantageofthemothercountries，andtheaimofstatesmenwas
tomakethecolonialtradeanewsourceofpublicrevenue。Eachnation，asawhole，workingforitsownpower，andthe
greateronesforpredominance，theyenteredintoacompetitivestruggleintheeconomicnolessthaninthepoliticalfield，
successintheformerbeingindeed，bytherulers，regardedasinstrumentaltopre—eminenceinthelatter。Anationaleconomic
interestcametoexist，ofwhichtheGovernmentmadeitselftherepresentativehead。Statesbecameasortofartificial
hothousesfortherearingofurbanindustries。Productionwassubjectedtosystematicregulationwiththeobjectofsecuring
thegoodnessandcheapnessoftheexportedarticles，andsomaintainingtheplaceofthenationinforeignmarkets。The
industrialcontrolwasexercised，inpartdirectlybytheState，butlargelyalsothroughprivilegedcorporationsandtrading
companies。Highdutiesonimportswereresortedto，atfirstperhapsmainlyforrevenue，butafterwardsintheinterestof
nationalproduction。，Commercialtreatieswereaprincipalobjectofdiplomacy，theendinviewbeingtoexcludethe
competitionofothernationsinforeignmarkets，whilstinthehomemarketaslittleroomaspossiblewasgivenforthe
introductionofanythingbutrawmaterialsfromabroad。ThecolonieswereprohibitedfromtradingwithotherEuropean
nationsthantheparentcountry，towhichtheysuppliedeitherthepreciousmetalsorrawproducepurchasedwithhome
manufactures。ItisevidentthatwhatisknownastheMercantiledoctrinewasessentiallythetheoreticcounterpartofthe
practicalactivitiesofthetime，andthatnationsandGovernmentswereledtoit，notbyanyformofscientificthought，butby
theforceofoutwardcircumstance，andtheobservationoffactswhichlayonthesurface。
Andyet，ifweregardthequestionfromthehighestpointofviewofphilosophichistory，wemustpronouncetheuniversal
enthusiasmofthissecondmodernphaseformanufacturesandcommercetohavebeenessentiallyjust，asleadingthenations
intothemainavenuesofgeneralsocialdevelopment。Ifthethoughtoftheperiod，insteadofbeingimpelledbycontemporary
circumstances，couldhavebeenguidedbysociologicalprevision，itmusthaveenteredwithzealuponthesamepathwhichit
empiricallyselected。Theorganizationofagriculturalindustrycouldnotatthatperiodmakeanymarkedprogress，forthe
directionofitsoperationswasstillinthehandsofthefeudalclass，whichcouldnotingeneralreallylearnthehabitsof
industriallife，orplaceitselfinsufficientharmonywiththeworkersonitsdomains。Theindustryofthetownshadtoprecede
thatofthecountry，andthelatterhadtobedevelopedmainlythroughtheindirectactionoftheformer。Anditisplainthatit
wasinthelifeofthemanufacturingproletariat，whoselaboursarenecessarilythemostcontinuousandthemostsocial，that
asystematicdisciplinecouldatalaterperiodbefirstapplied，tobeafterwardsextendedtotheruralpopulations。
ThattheeffortsofGovernmentsforthefurtheranceofmanufacturesandcommercewerereallyeffectivetowardsthatendis
admittedbyAdamSmith，andcannotreasonablybedoubted，thoughfreetradedoctrinaireshaveoftendeniedit。Technical
skillmusthavebeenpromotedbytheirencouragements;whilstnewformsofnationalproductionwerefosteredbyattracting
workmenfromothercountries，andbylighteningtheburdenoftaxationonstrugglingindustries。Communicationand
transportbylandandseaweremorerapidlyimprovedwithaviewtofacilitatetraffic;and，nottheleastimportanteffect，the
socialdignityoftheindustrialprofessionswasenhancedrelativelytothatoftheclassesbeforeexclusivelydominant。
Ithasoftenbeenaskedtowhomthefoundationofthemercantilesystem，intheregionwhetherofthoughtorofpractice，is
tobeattributed。Butthequestionadmitsofnoabsoluteanswer。Thatmodeofconceivingeconomicfactsarises
spontaneouslyinunscientificminds，andideassuggestedbyitaretobefoundintheGreekandLatinwriters。Thepolicy
whichitdictateswas，aswehaveshown，inspiredbythesituationoftheEuropeannationsattheopeningofthemodern
period。Suchapolicyhadbeenalreadyinsomedegreepractisedinthefourteenthandfifteenthcenturies，thusprecedingany
formalexpositionordefenceofitsspeculativebasis。Atthecommencementofthesixteenthcenturyitbegantoexercisea
widelyextendedinfluence。CharlesVadoptedit，andhisexamplecontributedmuchtoitspredominance。HenryVIIIand
Elizabethconformedtheirmeasurestoit。Theleadingstatessoonenteredonauniversalcompetition，inwhicheachPower
broughtintoplayallitspoliticalandfinancialresourcesforthepurposeofsecuringtoitselfmanufacturingandcommercial
preponderance。Throughalmostthewholeoftheseventeenthcenturytheprize，sofarascommercewasconcerned，
remainedinthepossessionofHolland，Italyhavinglostherformerascendencybytheopeningofthenewmaritimeroutes，
andbyherpoliticalmisfortunes，andSpainandGermanybeingdepressedbyprotractedwarsandinternaldissensions。The
admiringenvyofHollandfeltbyEnglishpoliticiansandeconomistsappearsinsuchwritersasRaleigh，Mun，Child，and
Temple;（4）andhowstronglythesamespectacleactedonFrenchpolicyisshownbyawell—knownletterofColberttoM。de
Pomponne，（5）ambassadortotheDutchStates。Cromwell，bytheNavigationAct，whichdestroyedthecarryingtradeof
HollandandfoundedtheEnglishempireofthesea，andColbert，byhiswholeeconomicpolicy，domesticandinternational，
werethechiefpracticalrepresentativesofthemercantilesystem。FromthelattergreatstatesmantheItalianpublicist
MengottigavetothatsystemthenameofColbertismo;butitwouldbeanerrortoconsidertheFrenchministerashaving
absolutelyaccepteditsdogmas。Heregardedhismeasuresastemporaryonly，andspokeofprotectivedutiesascrutchesby
thehelpofwhichmanufacturersmightlearntowalkandthenthrowthemaway。Thepolicyofexclusionshadbeen
previouslypursuedbySully，partlywithaviewtotheaccumulationofaroyaltreasure，butchieflyfromhisspecial
enthusiasmforagriculture，andhisdislikeoftheintroductionofforeignluxuriesasdetrimentaltothenationalcharacter。
Colbert’stariffof1664notmerelysimplifiedbutconsiderablyreducedtheexistingduties;thetariffof1667indeedincreased
them，butthatwasreallyapoliticalmeasuredirectedagainsttheDutch。ItseemscertainthatFranceowedinalargemeasure
tohispolicythevastdevelopmentoftradeandmanufactureswhichsomuchimpressedtheimaginationofcontemporary
Europe，andofwhichwehearsomuchfromEnglishwritersofthetimeofPetty。Butthispolicyhadalsoundeniablyitsdark
side。Industrywasforcedbysuchsystematicregulationtofollowinvariablecourses，insteadofadaptingitselftochanging
tastesandpopulardemand。Norwasitfreetosimplifytheprocessesofproduction，ortointroduceincreaseddivisionof
labourandimprovedappliances。Spontaneity，initiation，andinventionwererepressedordiscouraged，andthusulterior
sacrificedinagreatmeasuretoimmediateresults。Themoreenlightenedstatesmen，andColbertinparticular，endeavoured，
itistrue，tominimisethesedisadvantagesbyprocuring，oftenatgreatexpense，andcommunicatingtothetradesthrough
inspectorsnominatedbytheGovernment，informationrespectingimprovedprocessesemployedelsewhereintheseveral
arts;butthis，thoughinsomedegreeareal，wascertainlyonthewhole，andinthelongrun，aninsufficientcompensation。
Wemustnotexpectfromthewritersofthisstageanyexpositionofpoliticaleconomyasawhole;thepublicationswhich
appearedwereforthemostpartevokedbyspecialexigencies，andrelatedtoparticularquestions，usuallyofapracticalkind，
whicharoseoutofthegreatmovementsofthetime。TheywereinfactofthenatureofcounselstotheGovernmentsof
states，pointingouthowbesttheymightdeveloptheproductivepowersattheirdisposalandincreasetheresourcesoftheir
respectivecountries。Theyareconceived（asListclaimsforthem）strictlyinthespiritofnationaleconomy，and
cosmopolitanismisessentiallyforeigntothem。Onthesemonographsthemercantiletheorysometimeshadlittleinfluence，
theproblemsdiscussednotinvolvingitstenets。Butitmustinmostcasesbetakentobetheschemeoffundamentaldoctrine
（sofarasitwaseverentitledtosuchadescription）whichinthelastresortunderliesthewriter’sconclusions。
TheriseofpricesfollowingonthediscoveryoftheAmericanmineswasoneofthesubjectswhichfirstattractedthe
attentionoftheorists。Thisrisebroughtaboutagreatandgraduallyincreasingdisturbanceofexistingeconomicrelations，
andsoproducedmuchperplexityandanxiety，whichwereallthemorefeltbecausethecauseofthechangewasnot
understood。Tothiswasaddedthelossandinconveniencearisingfromthedebasementofthecurrencyoftenresortedtoby
sovereignsaswellasbyrepublicanstates。Italysufferedmostfromthislatterabuse，whichwasmultipliedbyherpolitical
divisions。ItwasthisevilwhichcalledforththeworkofCountGasparoScaruffi（Discorsosopralemoneteedellavera
proporzionefral’oroel’argento，1582）。Inthisheputforwardtheboldideaofauniversalmoney，everywhereidenticalin
size，shape，composition，anddesignation。Theprojectwas，ofcourse，premature，andwasnotadoptedevenbytheItalian
princestowhomtheauthorspeciallyappealed;butthereformisonewhich，doubtless，thefuturewillseerealised。Gian
DonatoTurbolo，masteroftheNeapolitanmint，inhisDiscorsieRelazioni，1629，protestedagainstanytamperingwiththe
currency。AnothertreatiserelatingtothesubjectofmoneywasthatoftheFlorentineBernardoDavanzati，otherwiseknown
astheabletranslatorofTacitus，LezionidelleMonete，1588。Itisaslightandsomewhatsuperficialproduction，only
remarkableaswrittenwithconcisenessandeleganceofstyle。（6）