17. Abuses of the customs duties, and the reform by the younger Pitt. [Lecky, Hist., chap. 16, Cabinet ed., 5: 295 ff.]
18. The commercial legislation of England and the American colonies, 1660-1760. [See the article with that title by W. J. Ashley, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1899-1900, 14: 1-29; republished in his Surveys, London., 1900.]
19. American smuggling, 1660-1760: to what extent was it practised; does it prove the English policy to have been oppressive? [Ashley, Surveys, 336-360.]
BIBLIOGRAPHY
See chapter xxi.
CHAPTER XXIV
FRANCE: SURVEY OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
264. Natural advantages of France in the modern period.—In preceding sections we have considered countries which for a time took the leading place in commerce among the states of Europe. We have now to study the development of the other states, to understand the share they took in commerce, and to note so far as possible the causes which kept them below the leaders.
Taking first France, we find a country which throughout the period enjoyed the reputation of being the richest state of Europe. Not only in area and population did it greatly exceed its traditional rival, England; it had also advantages of soil and climate which caused it to be regarded as favored beyond all others. Fronting both the Mediterranean and Atlantic, with easy access to the North Sea and Baltic, it had a better position for the sea commerce of the period than any other country, while internal transportation was facilitated by a remarkable system of navigable rivers, that brought the interior of the country into easy communication with the coast. Nor can we say that the French people of this period were inferior to those of other countries in their economic capacity. Before the beginning of the period and at intervals during its course they give evidence of productive ability which would have led to very different results under conditions such as more favored people, like the English, enjoyed. This holds true even of manufacturing, a branch of production in which the French have commonly been considered inferior by natural bent to the English.
265. The chief reason why France did not rise to leadership.—In spite of size, resources, and population, France did not rise above the second place mainly through the fault of the French organization, the arrangements that the French nation had for working together. We may compare the French state to a modern industrial corporation, which has a large capital invested in a valuable plant, and has good business openings; but in which the business is wrecked by quarrels among the stockholders, and by such a poor organization that president and directors can disregard the interests of the stockholders, can conduct affairs for their selfish profit, and can waste the company’s resources in enterprises that do not pay. The point will be made more clear if, as an introduction to the history of commerce in France, we sketch the general history of the country from the later Middle Ages to the French Revolution of 1789.
266. Progress checked by the Hundred Years’ War with England, and by religious conflicts.—In the fourteenth century it seemed as though France were going to lead Europe in the development of a new period. Agriculture and manufactures were flourishing; internal trade was active; and French ship-owners, growing accustomed to longer voyages, ventured far down the west coast of Africa and established trading stations even on the coast of Guinea. The country was plunged again into a condition of medieval chaos by the Hundred Years’ War (1336-1453), a war that hurt France vastly more than England because it was fought entirely on French soil. French and English armies, and “free companies” of organized bandits ravaged the country; the weight of taxes grew; trade dwindled, cities declined, and artisans emigrated.