Spoliation And Law
[Footnote 16: On the 27th of April, 1850, after a very curious
discussion, which was reproduced in the Moniteur, the General Council
of Agriculture, Manufactures and Commerce issued the following order:
Political economy shall be taught by the government professors, not
merely from the theoretical point of view of free trade, but also with
special regard to the facts and legislation which control French<
industry.
It was in reply to this decree that Bastiat wrote the pamphlet
Spoliation and Law, which first appeared in the Journal des
Economistes, May 15, 1850.]
To the Protectionists of the General Council of Manufactures:
GENTLEMEN--Let us for a few moments interchange moderate and friendly
opinions.
You are not willing that political economy should believe and teach free
trade.
This is as though you were to say, We are not willing that political
economy should occupy itself with society, exchange, value, law,
justice, property. We recognize only two principles--oppression and
spoliation.
Can you possibly conceive of political economy without society? Or of
society without exchange? Or of exchange without a relative value
between the two articles, or the two services, exchanged? Can you
possibly conceive the idea of value, except as the result of the
free consent of the exchangers? Can you conceive of one product being
worth another, if, in the barter, one of the parties is not free? Is
it possible for you to conceive of the free consent of two parties
without liberty? Can you possibly conceive that one of the contracting
parties is deprived of his liberty unless he is oppressed by the other?
Can you possibly conceive of an exchange between an oppressor and one
oppressed, unless the equivalence of the services is altered, or unless,
as a consequence, law, justice, and the rights of property have been
violated?
What do you really want? Answer frankly.
You are not willing that trade should be free!
You desire, then, that it shall not be free? You desire, then, that
trade shall be carried on under the influence of oppression? For if it
is not carried on under the influence of oppression, it will be carried
on under the influence of liberty, and that is what you do not desire.
Admit, then, that it is law and justice which embarrass you; that that
which troubles you is property--not your own, to be sure, but
another's. You are altogether unwilling to allow others to freely
dispose of their own property (the essential condition of ownership);
but you well understand how to dispose of your own--and of theirs.
And, accordingly, you ask the political economists to arrange this mass
of absurdities and monstrosities in a definite and well-ordered system;
to establish, in accordance with your practice, the theory of
spoliation.
But they will never do it; for, in their eyes, spoliation is a principle
of hatred and disorder, and the most particularly odious form which it
can assume is the legal form.
And here, Mr. Benoit d' Azy, I take you to task. You are moderate,
impartial, and generous. You are willing to sacrifice your interests and
your fortune. This you constantly declare. Recently, in the General
Council, you said: If the rich had only to abandon their wealth to make
the people rich we should all be ready to do it. [Hear, hear. It is
true.] And yesterday, in the National Assembly, you said: If I believed
that it was in my power to give to the workingmen all the work they
need, I would give all I possess to realize this blessing.
Unfortunately, it is impossible.
Although it pains you that the sacrifice is so useless that it should
not be made, and you exclaim, with Basile, Money! money! I detest
it--but I will keep it, assuredly no one will question a generosity so
retentive, however barren. It is a virtue which loves to envelop itself
in a veil of modesty, especially when it is purely latent and negative.
As for you, you will lose no opportunity to proclaim it in the ears of
all France from the tribune of the Luxembourg and the Palais
Legislatif.
But no one desires you to abandon your fortune, and I admit that it
would not solve the social problem.
You wish to be generous, but cannot. I only venture to ask that you will
be just. Keep your fortune, but permit me also to keep mine. Respect my
property as I respect yours. Is this too bold a request on my part?
Suppose we lived in a country under a free trade regime, where every
one could dispose of his property and his labor at pleasure. Does this
make your hair stand? Reassure yourself, this is only an hypothesis.
One would then be as free as the other. There would, indeed, be a law in
the code, but this law, impartial and just, would not infringe our
liberty, but would guarantee it, and it would take effect only when we
sought to oppress each other. There would be officers of the law,
magistrates and police; but they would only execute the law. Under such
a state of affairs, suppose that you owned an iron foundry, and that I
was a hatter. I should need iron for my business. Naturally I should
seek to solve this problem: How shall I best procure the iron necessary
for my business with the least possible amount of labor? Considering my
situation, and my means of knowledge, I should discover that the best
thing for me to do would be to make hats, and sell them to a Belgian who
would give me iron in exchange.
But you, being the owner of an iron foundry, and considering my case,
would say to yourself: I shall be obliged to compel that fellow to
come to my shop.
You, accordingly, take your sword and pistols, and, arming your numerous
retinue, proceed to the frontier, and, at the moment I am engaged in
making my trade, you cry out to me: Stop that, or I will blow your
brains out! But, my lord, I am in need of iron. I have it to sell.
But, sir, you ask too much for it. I have my reasons for that. But,
my good sir, I also have my reasons for preferring cheaper iron. Well,
we shall see who shall decide between your reasons and mine! Soldiers,
advance!
In short, you forbid the entry of the Belgian iron, and prevent the
export of my hats.
Under the condition of things which we have supposed (that is, under a
regime of liberty), you cannot deny that that would be, on your part,
manifestly an act of oppression and spoliation.
Accordingly, I should resort to the law, the magistrate, and the power
of the government. They would intervene. You would be tried, condemned,
and justly punished.
But this circumstance would suggest to you a bright idea. You would say
to yourself: I have been very simple to give myself so much trouble.
What! place myself in a position where I must kill some one, or be
killed! degrade myself! put my domestics under arms! incur heavy
expenses! give myself the character of a robber, and render myself
liable to the laws of the country! And all this in order to compel a
miserable hatter to come to my foundry to buy iron at my price! What if
I should make the interest of the law, of the magistrate, of the public
authorities, my interests? What if I could get them to perform the
odious act on the frontier which I was about to do myself?
Enchanted by this pleasing prospect, you secure a nomination to the
Chambers, and obtain the passage of a law conceived in the following
terms:
SECTION 1. There shall be a tax levied upon everybody (but especially
upon that cursed hat-maker).
SEC. 2. The proceeds of this tax shall be applied to the payment of men
to guard the frontier in the interest of iron-founders.
SEC. 3. It shall be their duty to prevent the exchange of hats or other
articles of merchandise with the Belgians for iron.
SEC. 4. The ministers of the government, the prosecuting attorneys,
jailers, customs officers, and all officials, are entrusted with the
execution of this law.
I admit, sir, that in this form robbery would be far more lucrative,
more agreeable, and less perilous than under the arrangements which you
had at first determined upon. I admit that for you it would offer a very
pleasant prospect. You could most assuredly laugh in your sleeve, for
you would then have saddled all the expenses upon me.
But I affirm that you would have introduced into society a vicious
principle, a principle of immorality, of disorder, of hatred, and of
incessant revolutions; that you would have prepared the way for all the
various schemes of socialism and communism.
You, doubtless, find my hypothesis a very bold one. Well, then, let us
reverse the case. I consent for the sake of the demonstration.
Suppose that I am a laborer and you an iron-founder.
It would be a great advantage to me to buy hatchets cheap, and even to
get them for nothing. And I know that there are hatchets and saws in
your establishment. Accordingly, without any ceremony, I enter your
warehouse and seize everything that I can lay my hands upon.
But, in the exercise of your legitimate right of self-defense, you at
first resist force with force; afterwards, invoking the power of the
law, the magistrate, and the constables, you throw me into prison--and
you do well.
Oh! ho! the thought suggests itself to me that I have been very awkward
in this business. When a person wishes to enjoy the property of other
people, he will, unless he is a fool, act in accordance with the law,
and not in violation of it. Consequently, just as you have made
yourself a protectionist, I will make myself a socialist. Since you have
laid claim to the right to profit, I claim the right to labor, or to
the instruments of labor.
For the rest, I read my Louis Blanc in prison, and I know by heart this
doctrine: In order to disenthrall themselves, the common people have
need of tools to work with; it is the function of the government to
provide them. And again: If one admits that, in order to be really
free, a man requires the ability to exercise and to develop his
faculties, the result is that society owes each of its members
instruction, without which the human mind is incapable of development,
and the instruments of labor, without which human activities have no
field for their exercise. But by what means can society give to each one
of its members the necessary instruction and the necessary instruments
of labor, except by the intervention of the State? So that if it
becomes necessary to revolutionize the country, I also will force my
way into the halls of legislation. I also will pervert the law, and make
it perform in my behalf and at your expense the very act for which it
just now punished me.
My decree is modeled after yours:
SECTION 1. There shall be taxes levied upon every citizen, and
especially upon iron founders.
SEC. 2. The proceeds of this tax shall be applied to the creation of
armed corps, to which the title of the fraternal constabulary shall be
given.
SEC. 3. It shall be the duty of the fraternal constabulary to make
their way into the warehouses of hatchets, saws, etc., to take
possession of these tools, and to distribute them to such workingmen as
may desire them.
Thanks to this ingenious device, you see, my lord, that I shall no
longer be obliged to bear the risks, the costs, the odium, or the
scruples of robbery. The State will rob for me as it has for you. We
shall both be playing the same game.
It remains to be seen what would be the condition of French society on
the realization of my second hypothesis, or what, at least, is the
condition of it after the almost complete realization of the first
hypothesis. I do not desire to discuss here the economy of the question.
It is generally believed that in advocating free trade we are
exclusively influenced by the desire to allow capital and labor to take
the direction most advantageous to them. This is an error. This
consideration is merely secondary. That which wounds, afflicts, and is
revolting to us in the protective system, is the denial of right, of
justice, of property; it is the fact that the system turns the law
against justice and against property, when it ought to protect them; it
is that it undermines and perverts the very conditions of society. And
to the question in this aspect I invite your most serious consideration.
What is law, or at least what ought it to be? What is its rational and
moral mission? Is it not to hold the balance even between all rights,
all liberties, and all property? Is it not to cause justice to rule
among all? Is it not to prevent and to repress oppression and robbery
wherever they are found?
And are you not shocked at the immense, radical, and deplorable
innovation introduced into the world by compelling the law itself to
commit the very crimes to punish which is its especial mission--by
turning the law in principle and in fact against liberty and property?
You deplore the condition of modern society. You groan over the disorder
which prevails in institutions and ideas. But is it not your system
which has perverted everything, both institutions and ideas?
What! the law is no longer the refuge of the oppressed, but the arm of
the oppressor! The law is no longer a shield, but a sword! The law no
longer holds in her august hands a scale, but false weights and
measures! And you wish to have society well regulated!
Your system has written over the entrance of the legislative halls these
words: Whoever acquires any influence here can obtain his share of the
legalized pillage.
And what has been the result? All classes of society have become
demoralized by shouting around the gates of the palace: Give me a share
of the spoils.
After the revolution of February, when universal suffrage was
proclaimed, I had for a moment hoped to have heard this sentiment: No
more pillage for any one, justice for all. And that would have been the
real solution of the social problem. Such was not the case. The doctrine
of protection had for generations too profoundly corrupted the age,
public sentiments and ideas. No. In making inroads upon the National
Assembly, each class, in accordance with your system, has endeavored to
make the law an instrument of rapine. There have been demanded heavier
imposts, gratuitous credit, the right to employment, the right to
assistance, the guaranty of incomes and of minimum wages, gratuitous
instruction, loans to industry, etc., etc.; in short, every one has
endeavored to live and thrive at the expense of others. And upon what
have these pretensions been based? Upon the authority of your
precedents. What sophisms have been invoked? Those that you have
propagated for two centuries. With you they have talked about
equalizing the conditions of labor. With you they have declaimed
against ruinous competition. With you they have ridiculed the let
alone principle, that is to say, liberty. With you they have said
that the law should not confine itself to being just, but should come to
the aid of suffering industries, protect the feeble against the strong,
secure profits to individuals at the expense of the community, etc.,
etc. In short, according to the expression of Mr. Charles Dupin,
socialism has come to establish the theory of robbery. It has done what
you have done, and that which you desire the professors of political
economy to do for you.
Your cleverness is in vain, Messieurs Protectionists, it is useless to
lower your tone, to boast of your latent generosity, or to deceive your
opponents by sentiment. You cannot prevent logic from being logic.
You cannot prevent Mr. Billault from telling the legislators, You have
granted favors to one, you must grant them to all.
You cannot prevent Mr. Cremieux from telling the legislators: You have
enriched the manufacturers, you must enrich the common people.
You cannot prevent Mr. Nadeau from saying to the legislators: You
cannot refuse to do for the suffering classes that which you have done
for the privileged classes.
You cannot even prevent the leader of your orchestra, Mr. Mimerel, from
saying to the legislators: I demand twenty-five thousand subsidies for
the workingmen's savings banks; and supporting his motion in this
manner:
Is this the first example of the kind that our legislation offers?
Would you establish the system that the State should encourage
everything, open at its expense courses of scientific lectures,
subsidize the fine arts, pension the theatre, give to the classes
already favored by fortune the benefits of superior education, the
most varied amusements, the enjoyment of the arts, and repose for old
age; give all this to those who know nothing of privations, and
compel those who have no share in these benefits to bear their part
of the burden, while refusing them everything, even the necessaries
of life?
Gentlemen, our French society, our customs, our laws, are so made
that the intervention of the State, however much it may be regretted,
is seen everywhere, and nothing seems to be stable or durable if the
hand of the State is not manifest in it. It is the State that makes
the Sevres porcelain, and the Gobelin tapestry. It is the State that
periodically gives expositions of the works of our artists, and of
the products of our manufacturers; it is the State which recompenses
those who raise its cattle and breed its fish. All this costs a great
deal. It is a tax to which every one is obliged to contribute.
Everybody, do you understand? And what direct benefit do the people
derive from it? Of what direct benefit to the people are your
porcelains and tapestries, and your expositions? This general
principle of resisting what you call a state of enthusiasm we can
understand, although you yesterday voted a bounty for linens; we can
understand it on the condition of consulting the present crisis, and
especially on the condition of your proving your impartiality. If it
is true that, by the means I have indicated, the State thus far seems
to have more directly benefited the well-to-do classes than those who
are poorer, it is necessary that this appearance should be removed.
Shall it be done by closing the manufactories of tapestry and
stopping the exhibitions? Assuredly not; but by giving the poor a
direct share in this distribution of benefits.
In this long catalogue of favors granted to some at the expense of all,
one will remark the extreme prudence with which Mr. Mimerel has left the
tariff favors out of sight, although they are the most explicit
manifestations of legal spoliation. All the orators who supported or
opposed him have taken upon themselves the same reserve. It is very
shrewd! Possibly they hope, by giving the poor a direct participation
in this distribution of benefits, to save this great iniquity by which
they profit, but of which they do not whisper.
They deceive themselves. Do they suppose that after having realized a
partial spoliation by the establishment of customs duties, other
classes, by the establishment of other institutions, will not attempt to
realize universal spoliation?
I know very well you always have a sophism ready. You say: The favors
which the law grants us are not given to the manufacturer, but to
manufactures. The profits which it enables us to receive at the
expense of the consumers are merely a trust placed in our hands. They
enrich us, it is true, but our wealth places us in a position to expend
more, to extend our establishments, and falls like refreshing dew upon
the laboring classes.
Such is your language, and what I most lament is the circumstance that
your miserable sophisms have so perverted public opinion that they are
appealed to in support of all forms of legalized spoliation. The
suffering classes also say. Let us by act of the Legislature help
ourselves to the goods of others. We shall be in easier circumstances as
the result of it; we shall buy more wheat, more meat, more cloth, and
more iron; and that which we receive from the public taxes will return
in a beneficent shower to the capitalists and landed proprietors.
But, as I have already said, I will not to-day discuss the economical
effects of legal spoliation. Whenever the protectionists desire, they
will find me ready to examine the sophisms of the ricochets, which,
indeed, may be invoked in support of all species of robbery and fraud.
We will confine ourselves to the political and moral effects of exchange
legally deprived of liberty.
I have said: The time has come to know what the law is, and what it
ought to be.
If you make the law for all citizens a palladium of liberty and of
property; if it is only the organization of the individual law of
self-defense, you will establish, upon the foundation of justice, a
government rational, simple, economical, comprehended by all, loved by
all, useful to all, supported by all, entrusted with a responsibility
perfectly defined and carefully restricted, and endowed with
imperishable strength. If, on the other hand, in the interests of
individuals or of classes, you make the law an instrument of robbery,
every one will wish to make laws, and to make them to his own advantage.
There will be a riotous crowd at the doors of the legislative halls,
there will be a bitter conflict within; minds will be in anarchy, morals
will be shipwrecked; there will be violence in party organs, heated
elections, accusations, recriminations, jealousies, inextinguishable
hates, the public forces placed at the service of rapacity instead of
repressing it, the ability to distinguish the true from the false
effaced from all minds, as the notion of justice and injustice will be
obliterated from all consciences, the government responsible for
everything and bending under the burden of its responsibilities,
political convulsions, revolutions without end, ruins over which all
forms of socialism and communism attempt to establish themselves; these
are the evils which must necessarily flow from the perversion of law.
Such, consequently, gentlemen, are the evils for which you have prepared
the way by making use of the law to destroy freedom of exchange; that is
to say, to abolish the right of property. Do not declaim against
socialism; you establish it. Do not cry out against communism; you
create it. And now you ask us Economists to make you a theory which will
justify you! Morbleu! make it yourselves.
More
-
A Chinese Story
They exclaim against the greed and the selfishness of the age! Open the thousand books, the thousand papers, the thousand pamphlets, which the Parisian presses throw out every day on the country; is not all this the work of little saints? Wha... A Negative Railroad
I have already remarked that when the observer has unfortunately taken his point of view from the position of producer, he cannot fail in his conclusions to clash with the general interest, because the producer, as such, must desire the existence ... Absolute Prices
If we wish to judge between freedom of trade and protection, to calculate the probable effect of any political phenomenon, we should notice how far its influence tends to the production of abundance or scarcity, and not simply of cheapness or dear... Abundance Scarcity
Which is the best for man or for society, abundance 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 ha... Appendix
We published an article entitled Dearness-Cheapness, which gained for us the two following letters. We publish them, with the answers: DEAR MR. EDITOR:--You upset all my ideas. I preached in favor of free trade, and found it very convenient ... Balance Of Trade
Our adversaries have adopted a system of tactics, which 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 principles? They abandon them with the best possible grace.... Capital And Interest
My object in this treatise is to examine into the real nature of the Interest of Capital, for the purpose of proving that it is lawful, and explaining why it should be perpetual. This may appear singular, and yet, I confess, I am more afraid of be... Capital And Interest
I address this treatise to the workmen of Paris, more especially to those who have enrolled themselves under the banner of Socialist democracy. I proceed to consider these two questions: 1st. Is it consistent with the nature of things, and with ju... Commentary
If this little book were destined to live three or four thousand years, to be read and re-read, pondered and studied, phrase by phrase, word by word, and letter by letter, from generation to generation, like a new Koran; if it were to fill the libra... Conclusion
All the Sophisms which I have so far combated, relate to the restrictive policy; and some even on this subject, and those of the most remarkable, I have, in pity to the reader, passed over: acquired rights; unsuitableness; exhaustion of money, etc... Conflicting Principles
There is one thing which embarrasses me not a little; and it is this: Sincere men, taking upon the subject of political economy the point of view of producers, have arrived at this double formula: A government should dispose of consumers subje... 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... Discriminating Duties
A poor laborer of Gironde had raised, with the greatest possible care and attention, a nursery of vines, from which, after much labor, he at last succeeded in producing a pipe of wine, and forgot, in the joy of his success, that each drop of this ... Does Protection Raise The Rate Of Wages?
Workmen, your situation is singular! you are robbed, as I will presently prove to you.... But no; I retract the word; we must avoid an expression which is violent; perhaps indeed incorrect; inasmuch as this spoliation, wrapped in the sophisms whic... Effort Result
We have seen that between 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 ... Equalizing Of The Facilities Of Production
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 th... Fourth Tableau
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.... Human Labor National Labor
Destruction of machinery--prohibition of foreign goods. These are two acts proceeding from the same doctrine. We do meet with men who, while they rejoice over the revelation of any great invention, favor nevertheless the protective policy; but s... Inferior Council Of Labor
What! You have the assurance to demand for every citizen the right to buy, sell, trade, exchange, and to render service for service according to his own discretion, on the sole condition that he will conduct himself honestly, and not defraud the r... Introduction
My object in this little volume has been to refute some of the arguments 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 s... Metaphors
A Sophism will sometimes expand and extend itself through the whole tissue of a long and tedious theory. Oftener it contracts into a principle, and hides itself in one word. Heaven preserve us, said Paul Louis, from the Devil and from the spiri... National Independence
Among the arguments advanced in favor of a restrictive system, we must not forget that which is drawn from the plea of national independence. What will we do, it is asked, in case of war, if we are at the mercy of England for our iron and coal? ... Natural History Of Spoliation
Why do I give myself up to that dry science, political economy? The question is a proper one. All labor is so repugnant in its nature that one has the right to ask of what use it is. Let us examine and see. I do not address myself to those ... 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, th... Obstructed Rivers Pleading For The Prohibitionists
Some years since, being at Madrid, I went to the meeting of the Cortes. The subject in discussion was a proposed treaty with Portugal, for improving the channel of the Douro. A member rose and said: If the Douro is made navigable, transportation m... Our Productions 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 fac... Petition From The Manufacturers Of Candles
To the Honorable the Members of the Chamber of Deputies: GENTLEMEN,--You are in the right way: you reject abstract theories; abundance, cheapness, concerns you little. You are entirely occupied with the interest of the producer, whom you are anx... Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
After this, therefore on account of this. The most common and the most false of arguments. Real suffering exists in England. This occurrence follows two others: First. The reduction of the tariff. Second. The loss of two consecutive harv... Raw Material
It is said that no commerce is so advantageous as that in which manufactured articles are exchanged for raw material; because the latter furnishes aliment for national labor. And it is hence concluded: That the best regulation of duties, woul... Reciprocity
We have just seen that all which renders transportation difficult, acts in the same manner as protection; or, if the expression be preferred, that protection tends towards the same result as obstacles to transportation. A tariff may then be tru... Reciprocity Again
Mr. de Saint Cricq has asked: Are we sure that our foreign customers will buy from us as much as they sell us? Mr. de Dombasle says: What reason have we for believing that English producers will come to seek their supplies from us, rather than f... Robbery By Bounties
They find my little book of Sophisms too theoretical, scientific, and metaphysical. Very well. Let us try a trivial, commonplace, and, if necessary, coarse style. Convinced that the public is duped in the matter of protection, I have desired to pr... Salt Postage And Customs
[This chapter is an amusing dialogue relating principally to English Postal Reform. Being inapplicable to any condition of things existing in the United States, it is omitted.--Translator.] ... 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 relation to each other that the arc of the ... Spoliation And Law
[Footnote 16: On the 27th of April, 1850, after a very curious discussion, which was reproduced in the Moniteur, the General Council of Agriculture, Manufactures and Commerce issued the following order: Political economy shall be taught by the g... Supremacy By Labor
As in a time of war, supremacy is attained by superiority in arms, can, in a time of peace, supremacy be secured by superiority in labor? This question is of the greatest interest at a time when no one seems to doubt that in the field of industr... 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 whic... The Little Arsenal Of The Free Trader
--If they say to you: There are no absolute principles; prohibition may be bad, and restriction good-- Reply: Restriction prohibits all that it keeps from coming in. --If they say to you: Agriculture is the nursing mother of the country-- R... The Plane
A very long time ago there lived, in a poor village, 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 reviewi... The Right And The Left Hand
[Report to the King.] SIRE--When we see these men of the Libre Echange 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 cr... The Sack Of Corn
Mathurin, in other respects as poor as Job, and obliged to earn his bread by day-labor, became, nevertheless, by some inheritance, the owner of a fine piece of uncultivated land. He was exceedingly anxious to cultivate it. Alas! said he, to make dit... The Tax Collector
JACQUES BONHOMME, Vine-grower. M. LASOUCHE, Tax Collector. L. You have secured twenty hogsheads of wine? J. Yes, with much care and sweat. --Be so kind as to give me six of the best. --Six hogsheads out of twenty! Good heavens! You want ... The Three Aldermen
A DEMONSTRATION IN FOUR TABLEAUX. First Tableau. [The scene is in the hotel of Alderman Pierre. The window looks out on a fine park; three persons are seated near a good fire.] Pierre. Upon my word, a fire is very comfortable when the stoma... The Two Hatchets
Petition of Jacques Bonhomme, Carpenter, to M. Cunin-Gridaine, Minister of Commerce. MR. MANUFACTURER-MINISTER: I am a carpenter, as was Jesus; I handle the hatchet and the plane to serve you. In chopping and splitting from morning until nigh... Theory Practice
Partisans of free trade, we are accused of being theorists, and not relying sufficiently upon practice. What a powerful argument against Mr. Say (says Mr. Ferrier,) is the long succession of distinguished ministers, the imposing league of writer... There Are No Absolute Principles
The facility with which men resign themselves to ignorance in cases where knowledge is all-important to them, is often astonishing; and we may be sure that a man has determined to rest in his ignorance, when he once brings himself to proclaim as a... 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... 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, restri... Two Systems Of Morals
Arrived at the end of the preceding chapter, if he gets so far, I imagine I hear the reader say: Well, now, was I wrong in accusing political economists of being dry and cold? What a picture of humanity! Spoliation is a fatal power, almost norm... 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, a... Wonderful Discovery!
At this moment, when all minds are occupied in endeavoring to discover the most economical means of transportation; when, to put these means into practice, we are leveling roads, improving rivers, perfecting steamboats, establishing railroads, and...