list2-第32部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！





errors　in　respect　to　the　advantages　and　disadvantages　of　protective



regulations；　which　we　cannot　here　omit　thoroughly　to　expose；



although　we　have　already　made　mention　of　them　in　general　terms



elsewhere。



　　　　In　order　to　prove　that　it　is　foolish　to　seek　to　produce



everything　in　one　and　the　same　country；　the　school　asks　the



question：　whether　it　would　be　reasonable　if　we　sought　to　produce



wine　by　growing　grapes　in　Scottish　and　English　greenhouses？　It　is



of　course　possible　to　produce　wine　in　this　manner；　only　lt　would　be



of　much　worse　quality　and　more　expensive　than　that　which　England



and　Scotland　could　procure　in　exchange　for　their　manufactured



goods。　To　anyone　who　either　is　unwilling　or　unable　to　penetrate



more　deeply　into　the　nature　of　things；　this　argument　is　a　striking



one；　and　the　school　is　indebted　to　it　for　a　large　portion　of　its



popularity；　at　any　rate　among　the　French　vine　growers　and　silk



manufacturers；　and　among　the　North　American　cotton　planters　and



cotton　merchants。　Regarded　in　the　light　of　day；　however；　it　is



fundamentally　false；　since　restrictions　on　commercial　intercourse



operate　quite　differently　on　the　productive　power　of　agriculture



than　they　do　on　the　productive　power　of　manufacturing　industry。



　　　　Let　us　first　see　how　they　operate　on　agriculture。



　　　　If　France　rejects　from　her　frontiers　German　fat　cattle；　or



corn；　what　will　she　effect　thereby？　In　the　first　place；　Germany



will　thereby　be　unable　to　buy　French　wines。　France　will　therefore



have　to　use　those　portions　of　her　soil　which　are　fitted　for　the



cultivation　of　the　vine　less　profitably　in　proportion　as　this



destruction　of　commercial　interchange　lessens　her　exportation　of



wines。　So　many　fewer　persons　will　be　exclusively　occupied　with　the



cultivation　of　the　vine；　and　therefore　so　much　less　native



agricultural　products　will　be　required；　which　these　persons　would



have　consumed；　who　would　have　otherwise　devoted　themselves



exclusively　to　vine　culture。　This　will　be　the　case　in　the



production　of　oil　as　well　as　in　that　of　wine。　France　will　therefore



always　lose　in　her　agricultural　power　on　other　points　much　more



than　she　gains　on　one　single　point；　because　by　her　exclusion　of　the



German　cattle　she　protects　a　trade　in　the　rearing　and　fattening　of



cattle　which　had　not　been　spontaneously　developed；　and　for　which；



therefore；　probably　the　agriculture　of　those　districts　where　this



branch　of　industry　has　had　to　be　artificially　developed　is　not



adapted。　Thus　will　it　be　if　we　consider　France　merely　as　an



agricultural　State　opposed　to　Germany　as　a　merely　agricultural



State；　and　if　we　also　assume　that　Germany　will　not　retaliate　on



that　policy　by　a　similar　one。　This　policy；　however；　appears　still



more　injurious　if　we　assume　that　Germany；　as　she　will　be　compelled



to　out　of　regard　to　her　own　interests；　adopts　similarly　restrictive



measures；　and　if　we　consider　that　France　is　not　merely　an



agricultural；　but　also　a　manufacturing　State。　Germany　will；　namely；



not　merely　impose　higher　duties　on　French　wines；　but　on　all　those



French　products　which　Germany　either　produces　herself；　or　can　more



or　less　do　without；　or　procure　elsewhere；　she　will　further　restrict



the　importation　of　those　manufactured　goods　which　she　cannot　at



present　produce　with　special　benefit；　but　which　she　can　procure



from　other　places　than　from　France。　The　disadvantage　which　France



has　brought　upon　herself　by　those　restrictions；　thus　appears　twice



or　three　times　greater　than　the　advantage。　It　is　evident　that　in



France　only　so　many　persons　can　be　employed　in　the　cultivation　of



the　vine；　in　the　cultivation　of　olives；　and　in　manufacturing



industry；　as　the　means　of　subsistence；　and　raw　materials　which



France　either　produces　herself　or　procures　from　abroad；　are　able　to



support　and　employ。　But　we　have　seen　that　the　restriction　of



importation　has　not　increased　the　agricultural　production；　but　has



merely　transferred　it　from　one　district　to　another。　If　free　course



had　been　permitted　to　the　interchange　of　products；　the　importation



of　products　and　raw　materials；　and　consequently　the　sale　of　wine；



oil；　and　manufactured　goods；　would　have　continually　increased；　and



consequently　the　number　of　persons　employed　in　the　cultivation　of



the　vine　and　olives；　and　in　manufactures；　while　with　the　increasing



traffic；　on　the　one　hand；　the　means　of　subsistence　and　raw



materials；　and；　on　the　other　hand；　the　demand　for　her　manufactured



products；　would　have　augmented。　The　augmentation　of　this　population



would　have　produced　a　larger　demand　for　those　provisions　and　raw



materials　which　cannot　easily　be　imported　from　abroad；　and　for



which　the　native　agriculture　possesses　a　natural　monopoly；　the



native　agriculture　therefore　would　thus　have　obtained　a　far　greater



profit。　The　demand　for　those　agricultural　products　for　which　the



character　of　the　French　soil　is　specially　adapted；　would　be　much



more　considerable　under　this　free　interchange　than　that　produced



artificially　by　restriction。　One　agriculturist　would　not　have　lost



what　another　gained；　the　whole　agriculture　of　the　country　would



have　gained；　but　still　more　the　manufacturing　industry。　Through



restriction；　the　agricultural　power　of　the　country　therefore　is　not



increased；　but　limited；　and　besides　this；　that　manufacturing　power



is　annihilated　which　would　have　grown　up　from　the　augmentation　of



the　internal　agriculture；　as　well　as　from　the　foreign　importation



of　provisions　and　raw　materials。　All　that　has　been　attained　through



the　restriction　is　an　increase　of　prices　in　favour　of　the



agriculturists　of　one　district　at　the　expense　of　the　agriculturists



of　another　district；　but　above　all；　at　the　expense　of　the　total



productive　force　of　the　country。



　　　　The　disadvantages　of　such　restrictions　on　the　interchange　of



products　are　still　more　clearly　brought　to　light　in　the　case　of



England　than　in　that　of　France。　Through　the　corn　laws；　on　doubt；　a



quantity　of　unfertile　land　is　brought　under　cultivation；　but　it　is



a　question　whether　these　lands　would　not　have　been　brought　under



cultivation　without　them。　The　more　wool；　timber；　cattle；　and　corn



that　England　would　have　imported；　the　more　manufactured　goods　would



she　have　sold；　the　greater　number　of　workmen　would　have　been



enabled　to　live　in　England；　the　higher　would　the　prosperity　of　the



working　classes　have　risen。　England　would　probably　have　doubled　the



number　of　her　workmen。　Every　single　workman　would　have　lived



better；　would　have　been　better　able　to　cultivate　a　garden　for　his



pleasure　and　for　the　production　of　useful　vegetables；　and　would



have　supported　himself　and　his