20.23. 23. To what Nations Commerce is prejudicial.
Riches consist either
in lands or in movable effects. The soil of every country is commonly
possessed by the natives. The laws of most states render foreigners
unwilling to purchase their lands; and nothing but the presence of the
owner improves them: this kind of riches, therefore, belongs to every
state in particular; but movable effects, as money, notes, bills of
exchange, stocks in companies, vessels, and, in fine, all merchandise,
belong to the whole world in general; in this respect, it is composed of
but one single state, of which all the societies upon earth are members.
The people who possess more of these movable effects than any other on
the globe are the most opulent. Some states have an immense quantity
acquired by their commodities, by the labour of their mechanics, by
their industry, by their discoveries, and even by chance. The avarice of
nations makes them quarrel for the movables of the whole universe. If we
could find a state so unhappy as to be deprived of the effects of other
countries, and at the same time of almost all its own, the proprietors
of the lands would be only planters to foreigners. This state, wanting
all, could acquire nothing; therefore, it would be much better for the
inhabitants not to have the least commerce with any nation upon earth,
for commerce in these circumstances must necessarily lead them to
poverty.
A country that constantly exports fewer manufactures or commodities
than it receives will soon find the balance sinking; it will receive
less and less, until, falling into extreme poverty, it will receive
nothing at all.
In trading countries the specie, which suddenly vanishes, quickly
returns; because those nations that have received it are its debtors.
But it never returns into those states of which we have just been
speaking, because those who have received it owe them nothing.
Poland will serve us for an example. It has scarcely any of those
things which we call the movable effects of the universe, except corn,
the produce of its lands. Some of the lords possess entire provinces;
they oppress the husbandmen, in order to have greater quantities of
corn, which they send to strangers, to procure the superfluous demands
of luxury. If Poland had no foreign trade, its inhabitants would be
happier. The grandees, who would have only their corn, would give it to
their peasants for subsistence; as their too extensive estates would
become burdensome, they would divide them among their peasants; every
one would find skins or wool in their herds or flocks, so that they
would no longer be at an immense expense in providing clothes; the
great, who are ever fond of luxury, not being able to find it but in
their own country, would encourage the labour of the poor. This nation,
I affirm, would then become more flourishing, at least if it did not
become barbarous; and this the laws might easily prevent.
Let us next consider Japan. The vast quantity of what they receive
is the cause of the vast quantity of merchandise they send abroad.
Things are thus in as nice an equilibrium as if the importation and
exportation were but small. Besides, this kind of exuberance in the
state is productive of a thousand advantages; there is a greater
consumption, a greater quantity of those things on which the arts are
exercised; more men employed, and more numerous means of acquiring
power; exigencies may also happen that require a speedy assistance,
which so opulent a state can better afford than any other. It is
difficult for a country to avoid having superfluities; but it is the
nature of commerce to render the superfluous useful, and the useful
necessary. The state will be, therefore, able to afford necessaries to a
much greater number of subjects.
Let us say, then, that it is not those nations who have need of
nothing that must lose by trade; it is those who have need of
everything. It is not such people as have a sufficiency within
themselves, but those who are most in want, that will find an advantage
in putting a stop to all commercial intercourse.
