An Inquiry into the Principles of Political Oeconomy (Vol. 2 of 2): Being an essay on the science of domestic policy in free nations. In which are particularly considered population, agriculture, trade, industry, money, coin, interest, circulation, banks, exchange, public credit, and taxesSteuart, James, Sir
General
An Inquiry into the Principles of Political Oeconomy (Vol. 2 of 2): Being an essay on the science of domestic policy in free nations. In which are particularly considered population, agriculture, trade, industry, money, coin, interest, circulation, banks, exchange, public credit, and taxes
Steuart, James, Sir
Economics
There are thousands of examples where mankind, with their learning and
reasoning, have turned common sense into inextricable science; this I
think is a famous instance of it: and it is rendring no small service
to the world, to destroy, in a manner, what others have been at so
much pains to establish. This is restoring common sense to its native
dress, in which it becomes intelligible to every one.
I know very well that the ministry of France have now very different
notions concerning paper credit; but these notions have not as yet
reached the press, except in some of the King’s answers to the
remonstrances of the parliament of Paris in 1760. These answers were
dictated upon sound principles, and do great honour to the ministry.
The old notions still prevailed in the remonstrances of the
parliament. This plainly appears from the proposal they made to the
King, at that time, to issue paper to the amount of 200 millions,
which the parliament was to make good. An expedient to avoid doing
that which right reason demanded of them, viz. first to secure a fund
for the paper, and then to borrow upon that fund. This proposal from
the parliament, and the King’s rejecting it, proves that credit was
then better understood in the cabinet than in the _palais_.
And on the other hand, let the bank paper exceed the quantity of coin in
the proportion of a thousand to one, yet still it is perfectly good and
sufficient, providing the bank be possessed of an equivalent value in
any species of good property. This I throw in here to point out how far
the French were, at least at that time, and many years after, when Dutot
and Melon wrote, from forming any just notion of the principles of
banking. And, I believe, I may venture to say, that the only reason why
banks have never been established in France, is, because the whole
operation is still a mystery to them. I ground this conjecture upon an
opinion of M. de Montesquieu, who thinks that banks are incompatible
with pure monarchy; a proposition he would never have advanced had he
understood the principles upon which they are established.
The next remarkable and interesting revolution made upon this famous
bank, was by the _arret_ of February 22, 1720; which constituted the
union of the royal bank with the company of the Indies.
By this _arret_, the King delivered to that company the whole management
of the bank with all the profits made by him since the first of January
1719, and in time coming. Notwithstanding this cession, the King
remained guarantee for all the notes, which were not to be coined
without an order of council: the company was to be responsible to the
King at all times for their administration; and, as a security for their
good management, they engaged to lend the King no less than sixteen
hundred millions of livres.
Here is the æra and beginning of all the confusion. From this loan
proceeded the downfal of the whole system.
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