第5章
But，whilstbythissortofactionfurtheringtheascendencyofthenewforces，therulingpowers，bothinEnglandandFrance，
betrayedthealarmtheyfeltatthesubversivetendencieswhichappearedinherentinthemodernmovementbytakingupin
theirdomesticpolicyanattitudeofresistance。ReactionbecametriumphantinFranceduringthelatterhalfofthereignof
LouisXIV，underthedisastrousinfluenceofMadamedeMaintenon。InEngland，afterthetransactionof1688，bywhichthe
Governmentwasconsolidatedonthedoublebasisofaristocraticpowerandofficialorthodoxy，thestatepolicybecamenot
somuchretrogradeasstationary，industrialconquestbeingputforwardtosatisfythemiddleclassandweanitfromthe
pursuitofasocialrenovation。Inbothcountriestherewasforsometimeanoticeablecheckintheintellectualdevelopment，
andRoscherandothershaveobservedthat，ineconomicstudiesparticularly，thefirstthreedecadesoftheeighteenthcentury
wereaperiodofgeneralstagnation，eclecticismforthemostparttakingtheplaceoforiginality。Themovementwas，
however，soontoberesumed，butwithanalteredandmoreformidablecharacter。Thenegativedoctrine，whichhadrisen
andtakenadefiniteforminEngland，wasdiffusedandpopularisedinFrance，whereitbecameevident，evenbeforethe
decisiveexplosion，thattheonlypossibleissuelayinaradicalsocialtransformation。ThepartialschoolsofVoltaireand
Rousseauindifferentwaysleduptoaviolentcrisis，whilsttakinglittlethoughtoftheconditionsofasystemwhichcould
replacetheold;butthemorecompleteandorganicschool，ofwhichDiderotisthebestrepresentative，lookedthrough
freedomtoathoroughreorganisation。ItsconstructiveaimisshownbythedesignoftheEncyclopédie——aproject，however，
whichcouldhaveonlyatemporarysuccess，becausenorealsynthesiswasforthcoming，andthisjointproductionofminds
oftendivergentcouldpossessnomorethananexternalunity。Itwaswiththisgreatschoolthatthephysiocratswere
speciallyconnected;and，incommonwithitsothermemberswhilstpushingtowardsanentirechangeoftheexistingsystem，
theyyetwouldgladlyhaveavoidedpoliticaldemolitionthroughtheexerciseofaroyaldictatorship，orcontemplateditonly
asthenecessaryconditionofanewandbetterorderofthings。But，thoughmarkedoffbysuchtendenciesfromthepurely
revolutionarysects，theirmethodandfundamentalideaswerenegative，resting，astheydid，essentiallyonthebasisofthejus
natura。WeshallfollowindetailtheseFrenchdevelopmentsintheirspecialrelationtoeconomicscience，andafterwards
noticethecorrespondingmovementsinotherEuropeancountrieswhichshowedthemselvesbeforetheappearanceofAdam
Smith，orwereatleastunaffectedbyhisinfluence。
BEFOREADAMSMITH
FranceThemoreliberal，aswellasmorerational，principlesputforwardbytheEnglishthinkersofthenewtypebegan，earlyinthe
eighteenthcentury，tofindanechoinFrance，wheretheclearerandmorevigorousintellectswerepreparedfortheir
receptionbyasenseofthegreatevilswhichexaggeratedmercantilism，servingasinstrumentofpoliticalambition，had
producedinthatcountry。Theimpoverishedconditionoftheagriculturalpopulation，theoppressiveweightandunequal
impositionoftaxation，andtheunsoundstateofthepublicfinanceshadproducedageneralfeelingofdisquiet，andled
severaldistinguishedwriterstoproteststronglyagainstthepolicyofColbertandtodemandacompletereform。
ThemostimportantamongstthemwasPierreBoisguillebert（d。1714），whosewholelifewasdevotedtothesecontroversies。
Inhisstatisticalwritings（DétaildelaFrancesouslerègneprésent，1697;FactumdelaFrance，1707），hebringsoutin
gloomycoloursthedarksideoftheageofLouisXIV，andinhistheoreticworks（Traitédelanatureetducommercedes
grains;Dissertationssurlanaturedesreichessesdel’argentetdestributs;andEssaisurlararetédel’argent）heappears
asanearnest，evenpassionate，antagonistofthemercantileschool。Heinsistsagainandagainonthefactthatnationalwealth
doesnotconsistingoldandsilver，butinusefulthings，foremostamongwhicharetheproductsofagriculture。Heevengoes
sofarastospeakof"argentcriminel，"whichfrombeingtheslaveoftrade，asitoughttobe，hadbecomeitstyrant。Hesets
the"genuinelyFrenchSully"farabovethe"ItalianisingColbert，"andcondemnsallarbitraryregulationsaffectingeither
foreignorinternalcommerce，especiallyasregardsthecorntrade。NationalwealthdoesnotdependonGovernments，whose
interferencedoesmoreharmthangood;thenaturallawsoftheeconomicorderofthingscannotbeviolatedorneglected
withimpunity;theinterestsottheseveralclassesofsocietyinasystemoffreedomareidentical，andthoseofindividuals
coincidewiththatofthestate。Asimilarsolidarityexistsbetweendifferentnations;intheireconomicdealingstheyare
relatedtotheworldasindividualtownstoanation，andnotmerelyplenty，butpeaceandharmony，willresultfromtheir
unfetteredintercourse。Menhedividesintotwoclasses——thosewhodonothingandenjoyeverything，andthosewholabour
frommorningtonightoftenwithoutearningabaresubsistence;thelatterhewouldfavourineveryway。Herewecatchthe
breathofpopularsympathywhichfillsthesocialatmosphereoftheeighteenthcentury。Hedwellswithspecialemphasison
theclaimsofagriculture，whichhadinFrancefallenintounmeritedneglect，andwithaviewtoitsimprovementcallsfora
reformintaxation。Hewouldreplaceindirecttaxesbytaxesonincome，andwouldrestorethepaymentoftaxesinkind，with
theobjectofsecuringequalityofburdenandeliminatingeveryelementofthearbitrary。Hehassomeinterestingviewsofa
generalcharacter:thusheapproximatestoacorrectconceptionofagriculturalrent，andhepointstotheorderinwhich
humanwantsfolloweachother——thoseofnecessity，convenience，comfort，superfluity，andostentationsucceedinginthe
ordernamed，andceasingintheinverseordertobefeltaswealthdecreases。ThedepreciatingtoneinwhichVoltairespeaks
ofBoisguillebert（SiècledeLouisXIV，chap30）iscertainlynotjustified;hehadagreateconomictalent，andhiswritings
containimportantgermsoftruth。Butheappearstohaveexertedlittleinfluence，theoreticalorpractical，inhisowntime。
ThesamegenerallineofthoughtwasfollowedbyMarshaldeVauban（1633—1707）inhiseconomictracts，especiallythat
bearingthetitleofProjetd’unedixmeRoyale，1707，whichwassuppressedbytheauthorities，andlostforhimthefavourof
hissovereign，buthasaddedlustretohisnameinthejudgmentofposterity。Heisdeeplyimpressedwiththedeplorable
conditionoftheworkingclassesofFranceinhisday。HeurgesthattheaimoftheGovernmentshouldbethewelfareofall
ordersofthecommunity;thatallareentitledtolikefavourandfurtherance;thattheoftendespisedandwrongedlowerclass
isthebasisofthesocialorganisation;thatlabouristhefoundationofallwealth，andagriculturethemostimportantspecies
oflabour;thatthemostessentialconditionofsuccessfulindustryisfreedom;andthatallunnecessaryorexcessive
restrictionsonmanufacturesandcommerceshouldbesweptaway。Heprotestsinparticularagainsttheinequalitiesof
taxation，andtheexemptionsandprivilegesenjoyedbythehigherranks。Withtheexceptionofsomedutiesonconsumption
hewouldabolishalltheexistingtaxes，andsubstituteforthemasingletaxonincomeandland，impartiallyappliedtoall
classes，whichhedescribesunderthenameof"DixmeRoyale，"thatistosay，atenthinkindofallagriculturalproduce，and
atenthofmoneyincomechargeableonmanufacturersandtraders。（1）
TheliberalandhumanespiritofFénelonledhimtoaspireafterfreedomofcommercewithforeignnations，andtopreachthe
doctrinethatthetruesuperiorityofonestateoveranotherliesinthenumberindeed，butalsointhemorality，intelligence，
andindustrioushabitsofitspopulation，TheTélémaque，inwhichtheseviewswerepresentedinanattractiveform，was
welcomedandreadamongstallranksandclasses，andwasthusaneffectiveorganforthepropagationofopinion。
AfterthesewitersthereisamarkedblankinthefieldofFrencheconomicthought，brokenonlybytheRéflexionsPolitiques
surlesFinancesetleCommerce19738）ofDutot，apupilofLaw，andthesemi—mercantilistEssaisPolitiquessurele
Commerce（1731）ofMélon，tillwecometothegreatnameofMontesquieu。TheEspritdesLois（1748），sofarasitdeals
witheconomicsubjects，iswrittenuponthewholefromapointofviewadversetothemercantilesystem，especiallyinhis
treatmentofmoney，thoughinhisobservationsoncoloniesandelsewherehefallsinwiththeideasofthatsystem。His
immortalservice，however，wasnotrenderedbyanyspecialresearch，butbyhisenforcementofthedoctrineofnaturallaws
regulatingsocialnolessthanphysicalphenomena。ThereisnootherthinkerofimportanceoneconomicsubjectsinFrance
tilltheappearanceofthephysiocrats，whichmarksanepochinthehistoryofthescience。
TheheadsofthephysiocraticschoolwereFrançoisQuesnay（1694—1774）andJeanClaudeMarieVincent，sieurdeGournay
（1712—1759）。Theprinciplesoftheschoolhadbeenputforwardin1755byRichardCantillon，aFrenchmerchantofIrish
extraction（EssaisurlanatureduCommerceengénéral），whosebiographyJevonshaselucidated，（2）andwhomheregards
asthetruefounderofpoliticaleconomy;butitwasinthehandsofQuesnayandGournay（3）thattheyacquiredasystematic
form，andbecamethecreedofaunitedgroupofthinkersandpracticalmen，bentoncarryingthemintoaction。Themembers
ofthegroupcalledthemselves"leséconomistes，"butitismoreconvenient，becauseunambiguous，todesignatethembythe
name"physiocrates，"inventedbyDupontdeNemours，whowasoneoftheinumber。Inthisname，intendedtoexpressthe
fundainentalideaoftheschool，muchmoreisimpliedthanthesubjectionofthephenomenaofthesocial，andinparticular
theeconomic，worldtofixedrelationsofco—existenceandsuccession。Thisisthepositivedoctrinewhichliesatthebottom
ofalltruescience。Butthelawofnaturereferredtointhetitleofthesectwassomethingquitedifferent。Thetheological
dogmawhichrepresentedallthemovementsoftheuniverseasdiectedbydivinewisdomandbenevolencetotheproduction
ofthegreatestpossiblesumofhappinesshadbeentransformedinthehandsofthemetaphysiciansintotheconceptionofajusnaturae，aharmoniousandbeneficialcodeestablishedbythefavouriteentityofthesethinkers，Nature，antecedentto
humaninstitutions，andfurnishingthemodeltowhichtheyshouldbemadetoconform。Thisidea，whichBuckleapparently
supposestohavebeenaninventionofHutcheson’s，hadcomedownthroughRomanjuridicaltheoryfromthespeculationsof
Greece。（4）ItwastakeninhandbythemodernnegativeschoolfromHobbestoRousseau，andusedasapowerfulweaponof
assaultupontheexistingorderofsociety，withwhichthe"natural"orderwasperpetuallycontrastedasofferingthe
imperfecttypefromwhichfacthaddeplorablydiverged。Thetheoryreceiveddifferentapplicationsaccordingtothediversity
ofmindsorcicumstances。Bysomeitwasdiectedagainsttheartificialmannerofthetimes，byothersagainstcontemporary
politicalinstitutions;itwasspecialtyemployedbythephysiocratsincriticisingtheeconomicpracticeofEuropean
Governments。
Thegeneralpoliticaldoctrineisasfollows。Societyiscomposedofanumberofindividualsallhavingthesamenatural
rights。ifalldonotpossess（assomemembersofthenegativeschoolmaintained）equalcapacities，eachcanatleastbest
understandhisowninterest，andisledbynaturetofollowit。Thesocialunionisreallyacontractbetweentheseindividuals，
theobjectofwhichisthelimitationofthenaturalfreedomofeach，justsofarasitisinconsistentwiththerightsofthe
others。Government，thoughnecessary，isanecessaryevil;andthegoverningpowerappointedbyconsentshouldbelimited
totheamountofinterferenceabsolutelyrequiredtosecurethefulfilmentofthecontract。Intheeconomicsphere，this
impliestherightoftheindividualtosuchnaturalenjoymentsashecanacquirebyhislabour。Thatlabour，therefore，should
beundisturbedandunfettered;anditsfruitsshouldbeguaranteedtothepossessor;inotherwords，propertyshouldbe
sacred。Eachcitizenmustbeallowedtomakethemostofhislabour;andthereforefreedomofexchangeshouldbeensured，
andcompetitioninthemarketshouldbeunrestricted，nomonopoliesorprivilegesbeingpermittedtoexist。
Thephysiocratsthenproceedwiththeeconomicanalysisasfollows。Onlythoselaboursaretruly"productive"whichaddto
thequantityofrawmaterialsavailableforthepurposesofman;andtherealannualadditiontothewealthofthecommunity
consistsoftheexcessofthemassofagriculturalproducts（including，ofcourse，minerals）overtheircostofproduction。On
theamountofthis"productnet"dependsthewell—beingofthecommunity，andthepossibilityofitsadvanceincivilization。
Themanufacturermerelygivesanewformtothematerialsextractedfromtheearth;thehighervalueoftheobject，afterit
haspassedthroughhishands，onlyrepresentsthequantityofprovisionsandothermaterialsusedandconsumedinits
elaboration。Commercedoesnothingmorethantransferthewealthakeadyexistingfromonehandtoanother;whatthe
tradingclassesgaintherebyisacquiredatthecostofthenation，anditisdesirablethatitsamountshouldbeassmallas
possible。Theoccupationofthemanufacturerandmerchant，aswellastheliberalprofessions，andeverykindofpersonal
service，are"useful"indeed，buttheyare"sterile，"drawingtheirincome，notfromanyfundwhichtheythemselvescreate，
butfromthesuperauousearningsoftheagricultlvists。Perfectfreedomoftradenotonlyrests，aswehavealreadyseen，on
thefoundationofnaturalright，butisalsorecommendedbytheconsiderationthatitmakesthe"produitnet，"onwhichall
wealthandgeneralprogressdepend，aslargeaspossible。"Laissezfaire，laissezpasser"shouldthereforebethemottoof
Governments。TherevenueoftheState，whichmustbederivedaltogetherfromthisnetproduct，oughttoberaisedinthe
mostdirectandsimplestway，namely，byasingleimpostofthenatureofalandtax。（5）
Thespecialdoctrinerelatingtotheexclusiveproductivenessofagriculturearoseoutofaconfusionbetween"value"onthe
onehandand"matterandenergy"ontheother。Smithandothershaveshownthattheattempttofixthecharacterof
"sterility"onmanufacturesandcommercewasfoundedinerror。Andtheproposalofasingleimpôtterritorialfallstothe
groundwiththedoctrineonwhichitwasbased。Butsuchinfluenceastheschoolexerteddependedlittle，ifatall，onthese
peculiartenets，whichindeedsomeofitsmembersdidnothold，Theeffectiveresultofitsteachingwasmainlydestructive。It
continuedinamoresystematicformtheeffortsinfavourofthefreedomofindustryalreadybeguninEnglandandFrance。
TheessentialhistoricalonceofthephysiocratswastodiscreditradicallythemethodsfollowedbytheEuropean
Governmentsintheirdealingswithindustry。Forsuchcriticismastheirstherewas，indeed，ampleroom:thepolicyof
Colbert，whichcouldbeonlytemporarilyuseful，hadbeenabusivelyextendedandintensified;Governmentalactionhad
intrudeditselfintotheminutestdetailsofbusiness，andeveryprocessofmanufactureandtransactionoftradewashampered
bylegislativerestrictions。Itwastobeexpectedthatthereformersshould，inthespiritofthenegativephilosophy，
exaggeratethevicesofestablishedsystems;andtherecanbenodoubtthattheycondemnedtooabsolutelytheeconomic
actionoftheState，bothinprincipleandinitshistoricmanifestations，andpushedthe"laissezfaire"doctrinebeyonditsjust
limits。Butthiswasanecessaryincidentoftheirconnectionwiththerevolutionarymovement，ofwhichtheyreallyformed
onewing。Inthecourseofthatmovement，theprimitivesocialcontract，thesovereigntyofthepeople，andotherdogmas
nowseentobeuntenable，werehabituallyinvokedintheregionofpoliticsproper，andhadatransitoryutilityasreadyand
effectiveinstrumentsofwarfare。Andsoalsointheeconomicspherethedoctrinesofnaturalrightsofbuyingandselling，of
thesufficiencyofenlightenedselfishnessasaguideinmutualdealings，ofthecertaintythateachmemberofthesocietywill
understandandfollowhistrueinterests，andofthecoincidenceofthoseinterestswiththepublicwelfare，thoughtheywill
notbearadispassionateexamination，weretemporarilyusefulasconvenientandserviceableweaponsfortheoverthrowof
theestablishedorder。Thetendencyoftheschoolwasundoubtedlytoconsecratethespiritofindividualism，andthestateof
non—government。Butthistendency，whichmaywithjusticebeseverelycondemnedineconomistsofthepresenttime，was
thenexcusablebecauseinevitable。And，whilstitnowimpedestheworkofreconstructionwhichisforustheorderofthe
day，itthenaidedtheprocessofsocialdemolition，whichwasthenecessary，thoughdeplorable，conditionofanew
organisation。
Theseconclusionsastotherevolutionarytendenciesoftheschoolarenotatallaffectedbythefactthattheformof
governmentpreferredbyQuesnayandsomeofhischieffollowerswaswhattheycalledalegaldespotism，whichshould
embracewithinitselfboththelegislativeandtheexecutivefunction。Thereasonforthispreferencewasthatanenlightened
centralpowercouldmorepromptlyandefficaciouslyintroducethepolicytheyadvocatedthananassemblyrepresenting
divergentopinions，andfetteredbyconstitutionalchecksandlimitations。Turgot，asweknow，usedtheabsolutepowerof
thecrowntocarryintoeffectsomeofhismeasuresfortheliberationofindustry，thoughheultimatelyfailedbecause
unsustainedbytherequisiteforceofcharacterinLouisXVI。Butwhatthephysiocraticideawithrespecttothenormal
methodofgovernmentwasappearsfromQuesnay’sadvicetothedauphin，thatwhenhebecamekingheshould"donothing，
butletthelawsrule，"thelawshavingbeenofcoursefirstbroughtintoconformitywiththejusnaturae。Thepartialityofthe
schoolforagriculturewasinharmonywiththesentimentinfavourof"nature"andprimitivesimplicitywhichthenshowed
itselfinsomanyformsinFrance，especiallyincombinationwiththerevolutionaryspirit，andofwhichRousseauwasthe
mosteloquentexponent。Itwasalsoassociatedinthesewriterswithajustindignationatthewretchedstateinwhichthe
rurallabourersofFrancehadbeenleftbythescandalousneglectofthesuperiorordersofsociety——astateofwhichthe
terriblepicturedrawnbyLaBruyèreisanindestructiblerecord。Themembersofthephysiocraticgroupwereundoubtedly
menofthoroughuprightness，andinspiredwithasinceredesireforthepublicgood，especiallyforthematerialandmoral
elevationoftheworkingclasses。QuesnaywasphysiciantoLouisXV，andresidedinthepalaceatVersailles;butinthe
midstofthatcorruptcourthemaintainedhisintegrity，andspokewithmanlyfranknesswhathebelievedtobethetruth。And
neverdidanystatesmandevotehimselfwithgreatersinglenessofpurposeormoreearnestendeavourtotheserviceofhis
countrythanTurgot，whowastheprincipalpracticalrepresentativeoftheschool。
ThepublicationsinwhichQuesnayexpoundedhissystemwerethefollowing:（6）——Twoarticles，on"Fermiers"andon
"Grains，"intheEncyclopédieofDiderotandD’Alembert（1756，1757）;adiscourseonthelawofnatureinthePhysiocratic
ofDupontdeNemours（1768）;Maximesgénératlesdegouvernementéconomiqued’unroyaumeagricole（1758），andthe
simultaneouslypublishedTaleauÉconomiqueavecsonexplication，ouExtraitdesconomiesRoyalesdeSully（withthe
celebratedmotto"pauvrespaysans，pauvreroyaume;pauvreroyaume，pauvreroi"）;Dialoguesurlecommerceetles
travauxdesartisans;andotherminorpieces。TheTableauEconomique，thoughonaccountofitsdrynessandabstractform
itmetwithlittlegeneralfavour，maybeconsideredtheprincipalmanifestooftheschool。Itwasregardedbythefollowersof
Quesnayasentitledtoaplaceamongsttheforemostproductsofhumanwisdom，andisnamedbytheelderMirabeau，ina
passagequotedbyAdamSmith，（7）asoneofthethreegreatinventionswhichhavecontributedmosttothestabilityof
politicalsocieties，theothertwobeingthoseofwritingandofmoney。Itsobjectwastoexhibitbymeansofcertainformulas
thewayinwhichtheproductsofagriculture，whichistheonlysourceofwealth，wouldinastateofperfectlibertybe
distributedamongtheseveralclassesofthecommunity（namely，theproductiveclassesoftheproprietorsandcultivatorsof
land，andtheunproductiveclasscomposedofmanufacturersandmerchants），andtorepresentbyotherformulasthemodes
ofdistributionwhichtakeplaceundersystemsofGovernmentalrestraintandregulation，withtheevilresultsarisingtothe
wholesocietyfromdifferentdegreesofsuchviolationsofthenaturalorder。ItfollowsfromQuesnay’stheoreticviewsthat
theonethingdeservingthesolicitudeofthepracticaleconomistandthestatesmanistheincreaseofthenetproduct;andhe
infersalsowhatSmithafterwardsaffirmedonnotquitethesameground，thattheinterestofthelandowneris"strictlyand
inseparablyconnectedwiththegeneralinterestofthesociety。"（8）
M。deGournay，aswehaveseen，wasregardedasoneofthefoundersoftheschool，andappearstohaveexercisedsome
influenceevenupontheformationofQuesnay’sownopinions。WiththeexceptionoftranslationsofCulpeperandChild，（9）Gournaywrotenothingbutmemoisaddressedtoministers，whichhavenotseenthelight;butwehaveafullstatementofhis
viewsinthelogededicatedtohismemorybyhisillustriousfriendTurgot。WhilstQuesnayhadspenthisyouthamidstrural
scenes，andhadbeenearlyfamiliarwiththelaboursofthefield，Gournayhadbeenbredasamerchant，andhadpassedfrom
thecounting—housetotheonceofintendantofcommerce。Theythusapproachedthestudyofpoliticaleconomyfrom
differentsides，andthisdiversityoftheirantecedentsmayinpartexplaintheamountofdivergencewhichexistedbetween
theirviews。GournaysoftenedtherigourofQuesnay’ssystem，andbroughtitnearertothetruth，byrejectingwhatSmith
callsits"capitalerror"——thedoctrine，namely，oftheunproductivenessofmanufacturesandcommerce。Hedirectedhis
effortstotheassertionandvindicationoftheprincipleofindustrialliberty，anditwasbyhimthatthisprinciplewas
formulatedinthephrase，sincesooftenheardforgoodandforevil，"Laissezfaireetlaissezpasser。"Oneoftheearliestand
mostcompleteadherentsofthephysiocraticschool，aswellasanardentandunweariedpropagatorofitsdoctrines，was
VictorMirabeau，whosesincereandindependent，thoughsomewhatperverseandwhimsical，characterisfamiliartoEnglish
readersthroughCarlyle’sessayonhismorecelebratedson。HehadexpressedsomephysiocraticviewsearlierthanQuesnay，
butownedthelatterforhisspiritualfather，andadoptedmostofhisopinions，theprincipaldifferencebeingthathewas
favourabletothepetiteasopposedtothegrandeculture，whichlatterwaspreferredbyhischiefasgiving，notindeedthe
largestgross，butthelargestnetproduct。Miabeau’sprincipalwritingswereAmidesHommes，outraitésurlapopulation（1756，1760），Théoriedel’impôt（176），LesÉconimiques（1769）andPhilosophierurale，ouÉconomiegénéraleet
politiquedel’Agriculture（1763）。Thelastofthesewastheearliestcompleteexpositionofthephysiocraticsystem。Another
earnestandperseveringapostleofthesystemwasDupontdeNemours（1739—1817），knownbyhistreatisesDel’exportation
etl’imortationdesgrains（1764，Del’origineetdesprogrèsd’unesciencenouvelle（1767），DucommercedelaCompagnie
desIndies（1767），andespeciallybyhismorecomprehensiveworkPhysiocratie，ouConsitutionnaturelledugouvernement
leplusavantageusougenrehumain（1768）。Thetitleofthisworkgave，ashasbeenalreadymentioned，anametothe
school。Anotherformalexpositionofthesystem，towhichAdamSmithrefersasthe"mostdistinctandbestconnected
account"ofit，wasproducedbyMercier—Lariviére，underthetitleL’Ordrenatureletessentieldessociétéspolitiques（1767），atitlewhichisinterestingasembodyingtheideaofthejusnaturae。（10）BothheandDupontdeNemoursprofessed
tostudyhumancommunities，notonlyinrelationtotheireconomic，butalsototheirpoliticalandgeneralsocialaspects;but，
notwithstandingtheselargerpretensions，theirviewswerecommonlyrestrictedinthemaintotheeconomicsphere;atleast
materialconsiderationsdecidedlypreponderatedintheirinquiries，aswasnaivelyindicatedbyLarivièrewhenhesaid，
"Property，security，liberty——thesecomprisethewholesocialorder;therightofpropertyisatreeofwhichallthe
institutionsofsocietyarebranches。"
ThemosteminentmemberofthegroupwaswithoutdoubtAnneRobertJacquesTurgot（1727—1781）。Thisisnottheplace
tospeakofhisnoblepracticalactivity，firstasintendantofLimoges，andafterwardsforabriefperiodasfinanceminister，or
ofthecircumstanceswhichledtohisremovalfromoffice，andtheconsequentfailureofhiseffortsforthesalvationof
France。Hiseconomicviewsareexplainedintheintroductionstohisedictsandordinances，inlettersandoccasionalpapers，
butespeciallyinhisRéflexionssurlaformationetladistributiondesrichesses（1766）。Thisisacondensedbuteminently
clearandattractiveexpositionofthefundamentalprinciplesofpoliticaleconomy，astheywereconceivedbythephysiocrats。
Itembodies，indeed，theerroneousnolessthanthesounddoctrinesofthatschool;butseveralsubjects，especiallythe
variousformsofland—economy，thedifferentemploymentsofcapital，andthelegitimacyofinterest，arehandledina
generallyjustaswellasstrikingmanner;andthemodeofpresentationoftheideas，andtheluminousarrangementofthe
whole，areTurgot’sown。Thetreatise，whichcontainsasurprisingamountofmatterinproportiontoitslength，mustalways
retainaplaceamongtheclassicsofthescience。
Thephysiocraticschoolneverobtainedmuchdirectpopularinfluence，eveninitsnativecountry，thoughitstronglyattracted
manyofthemoregiftedandearnestminds。Itsmembers，writingondrysubjectsinanaustereandoftenheavystyle，didnot
findacceptancewithapublicwhichdemandedbeforeallthingscharmofmannerinthosewhoaddressedit。WhenMorellet，
oneoftheirnumber，enteredthelistswithGaliani，itwasseenhowespirit;andeloquencecouldtriumphoverscience，solid
indeed，butclumsyinitsmovements。（11）Thephysiocratictenets，whichwereinfactpartiallyerroneous，wereregardedby
manyaschemerical，andwereridiculedinthecontemporaryliterature，as，forexample，theimpôtuniquebyVoltaireinhisL’hommeauxquaranteécus，whichwasdirectedinparticularagainstMercier—Larivière。Itwasjustlyobjectedtothegroup
thattheyweretooabsoluteintheirviewofthings;theysupposed，asSmithremarksinspeakingofQuesnay，thatthe
body—politiccouldthriveonlyunderonepreciserégime，——that，namely，whichtheyrecommended，——andthoughttheir
doctrinesuniversallyandimmediatelyapplicableinpractice。（12）Theydidnot，astheorists，sufficientlytakeintoaccount
nationaldiversities，（13）ordifferentstagesinsocialdevelopment;nordidtheyaspoliticians，adequatelyestimatethe
impedimentswhichignorance，prejudice，andinterestedoppositionpresenttoenlightenedstatesmanship。Itispossiblethat
Turgothimself，asGrimmsuggests，owedhisfailureinparttothetoounbendingrigourofhispolicyandtheabsenceofany
attemptatconciliation。Bethisasitmay，hisdefeathelpedtoimpairthecreditofhisprinciples，whichwererepresentedas
havingbeentriedandfoundwanting。