DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.22140#0209
THE ECONOMIC DOCTRINE OF WASTE.
193
correspondence of Pepys with Houblon, now preserved in the
Bodleian library. From the same place came the most valuable
kinds of marble. In nearly all commodities Holland gave the
price, and it did so because its towns had a free market, to which
all the world resorted, for such a condition of things only can make
the regular quotation of trade prices permanently useful to dealers.
The Dutch, I admit, were manufacturers, in some articles the
successful manufacturing rivals of England ; but their principal
source of wealth, of that wealth, abundance of good products, on
which alone the capacity for any other industry can be based, was
to be traced to trade, and the policy of free trade. They got their
live stock from the Danish peninsula, says Smith, and "their corn
from almost all the disferent countries of Europe.'' Now it is a
sheer paradox to say that those callings, which secured plenty to
the Dutch consumer, and an ever-increasing wealth to the Dutch
burghers, could be exhibitions of unproductive consumption. To
make such an assertion is to indulge in the most barren form of
metaphysics, to dispute or disdain the evidence of facts, because
they do not square with an hypothesis.
As has often occurred in the history of economic science, the
extravagant conclusions at which the Economists arrived were in
great part due to the mischievous practices which they combated.
In just the same way, the excessive harshness of the doctrine of
laissez faire was a reaction against the incessant and vexatious
meddlesomeness of governments. It is very often thought to be
necessary, or at least expedient, to prove men and their practices
to be much more in the wrong than they really are, in order to
provoke that criticism which corrects the mischief which they
actually do. The Economists found the agriculturist degraded
and harassed. So they did not so much exaggerate his social
value, as they unduly depreciated the social value of every one else,
in order that they might get him some little consideration, and
ensure him some justice. By adroitly showing that it was the
interest of the rent receiver to take some thought of the person who
earned rent, a hint which from time to time landowners have been
slow to take, they got a few of his most notorious and indefensible
grievances redressed. They got the term extended during which
the grant of a lease would be valid against a future proprietor, by
14
193
correspondence of Pepys with Houblon, now preserved in the
Bodleian library. From the same place came the most valuable
kinds of marble. In nearly all commodities Holland gave the
price, and it did so because its towns had a free market, to which
all the world resorted, for such a condition of things only can make
the regular quotation of trade prices permanently useful to dealers.
The Dutch, I admit, were manufacturers, in some articles the
successful manufacturing rivals of England ; but their principal
source of wealth, of that wealth, abundance of good products, on
which alone the capacity for any other industry can be based, was
to be traced to trade, and the policy of free trade. They got their
live stock from the Danish peninsula, says Smith, and "their corn
from almost all the disferent countries of Europe.'' Now it is a
sheer paradox to say that those callings, which secured plenty to
the Dutch consumer, and an ever-increasing wealth to the Dutch
burghers, could be exhibitions of unproductive consumption. To
make such an assertion is to indulge in the most barren form of
metaphysics, to dispute or disdain the evidence of facts, because
they do not square with an hypothesis.
As has often occurred in the history of economic science, the
extravagant conclusions at which the Economists arrived were in
great part due to the mischievous practices which they combated.
In just the same way, the excessive harshness of the doctrine of
laissez faire was a reaction against the incessant and vexatious
meddlesomeness of governments. It is very often thought to be
necessary, or at least expedient, to prove men and their practices
to be much more in the wrong than they really are, in order to
provoke that criticism which corrects the mischief which they
actually do. The Economists found the agriculturist degraded
and harassed. So they did not so much exaggerate his social
value, as they unduly depreciated the social value of every one else,
in order that they might get him some little consideration, and
ensure him some justice. By adroitly showing that it was the
interest of the rent receiver to take some thought of the person who
earned rent, a hint which from time to time landowners have been
slow to take, they got a few of his most notorious and indefensible
grievances redressed. They got the term extended during which
the grant of a lease would be valid against a future proprietor, by
14