=190. Political importance of commerce in this period, connected with
the desire of governments for ready money.=—Commercial expansion in
this period depended, as said above, on the political power of the home
country. Did not, on the other hand, the political power of the state
depend on commerce? A statesman of the time would have answered this
question in the affirmative, and with an emphasis which would seem
strange now. We think nowadays that the resources of a state depend
upon the prosperity of the people, no matter whether this prosperity
comes from agriculture or from manufactures, from internal trade or
from foreign trade. Statesmen, however, of the period under discussion,
set a peculiarly high value on foreign commerce, and regarded it as a
more important branch of industry than any other.
[Illustration:
EUROPEAN
POWERS
IN
AMERICA
(About 1700)
]
The chief reason for this view lay in the fact that most of the
European states produced little or none of the precious metals, and
could get them only by trade with a neighbor or with a distant country.
Now money is “the sinews of war,” and when states were constantly at
war with each other, a good supply of money seemed to the statesman a
matter of the first necessity. We regard money nowadays only as a means
of procuring other forms of capital by exchange, and do not worry about
the money supply so long as capital in other forms is abundant. It may
have been the fact, however, that in the early period of the modern
state the fiscal and military systems operated more smoothly when the
stock of money in the country was abundant.
=191. The mercantile system, aiming to increase the stock of ready
money in the country.=—Whether rulers were justified or not in the
anxiety that they showed about the money supply, they made it a
cardinal point in their policy to regulate commerce so as to increase,
if possible, the stock of the precious metals in the country. They
argued that the country would make money if it sold more merchandise to
foreigners than it bought of them, for then the foreigners would have
to make up the balance in coin or bullion. This was called “a favorable
balance of trade,” as tending to bring money into the country. On the
other hand, if the country became indebted for foreign merchandise to
an amount greater than could be offset by the exports, the country
would owe a cash balance abroad, and this was an “unfavorable” balance
of trade. At the beginning of the period the government tried to effect
its object simply by prohibiting the export of bullion (gold and
silver); this was the “bullionist” policy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account