[A2-5-13] The important controversy concerning absenteeism may be answered in accordance with the principles laid down in this chapter. The mercantile system considered the rent sent to absentee landlords or capitalists as a tribute paid to foreign countries; but certainly improperly, as such rent is only the fruit of their property which the owners might have consumed in their own country, without giving any one a particle of it. Besides, these rents are not sent in cash to foreign countries, but in the form of those commodities to the exportation of which the country is peculiarly well adapted. Let us suppose, for instance, that the Irish absentees had all left the country at once. The tradesmen, personal servants, etc., to whom they had hitherto furnished employment would be greatly embarrassed to find a market for their services, etc., but the producers of linen and meat would have largely increased their exports, because an entirely new demand for their products would have arisen through the farmers of the absentees. The reverse would necessarily happen if all absentees were suddenly called home. Absenteeism which has lasted a long time injures no one economically. Many, recently, laud it even, because it permits every nation to devote their energies to the branches of production for which they are best qualified: Paris, for instance, to theatrical and luxury wares. The savings made by the English absentees on the continent, where things are cheaper, turn eventually to the advantage of England. (Thus, even Petty: Political Anatomy of Ireland, p. 81 ff. Foster, On the Principle of Commercial Exchanges between Great Britain and Ireland, 1804, p. 76 ff. Edinb. Rev., 1827. F. B. Hermann, Staatswirthschaftl. Untersuchungen, 355, 363 ff. Per contra, especially, Discourse of Trade and Coyn, 1697, p. 99. M. Prior, List of the Absenters of Ireland, 1730. A. Young; Tour in Ireland, 1780. Sir J. Sinclair, Hist. of the Public Revenue, 1804, III, 192 seq. Lady Morgan, On Absenteeism, 1825.) An aversion for absenteeism plays a chief part in all Carey's writings. Thus, even in his Rate of Wages, 45 ff.
On medieval complaints concerning the absenteeism of monasteries: Bodmann, Rheingauische Alterthümer, 751. From a higher point of view, it cannot, indeed, be ignored that absenteeism, largely developed, cripples the organic whole of national life. The most highly cultured and influential classes become estranged from their country, the great mass remaining behind coarser, economic production more one-sided, and all social contrasts more sharply defined. Disturbances in Rome, when Diocletian removed his residence from there; the decline of the Netherlands, very much promoted by the discontent which Philip II.'s departure for Spain produced. It was estimated, however, in 1697, that the English absentees caused a gain to France of £200,000 per annum. (Discourse of Trade, p. 93.) It is said that about 1833, 80,000 Englishmen traveled on the continent, and consumed £12,000,000 there. (Rau.) According to Brückner, the Russians who travel in foreign countries take 20,000,000 rubles a year out of the country with them. (Hildebrand's Jahrb., 1863, 59.) That the countries which receive these travelers receive no very great benefit from them, see in J. B. Say, Cours pratique. In Paris, there were, even in 1797, so many strangers who so enhanced the rents paid for maisons garnies that their expulsion was proposed. (A. Schmidt, Pariser Zustände, III, 78.)
SECTION VI.
INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL TREATIES.
All international commercial treaties have this object in common: to moderate the impediments to trade which arise from the differences and even from the enmities of states. According to time and character, they fall into three groups:
A. Medieval, where a barbarous state for the first time promises foreign merchants in general legal security, without which regular trade is unthinkable. Such treaties, where their provisions are not a matter of course, must be certainly considered as a salutary advance; and they may, under certain circumstances, be necessary even to-day.[A2-6-1]
B. Mercantilistic treaties, which close, perhaps, even a bloody commercial war carried on against a rival,[A2-6-2] or which by a closer connection with a state, whose rivalry is not so much feared, are intended to moderate the worst consequences of a general seclusion.[A2-6-3] Consistently carried out, and without any regard for consequences, the mercantile system really means a war of each state against all others, and it is no mere accident that after the cessation of the wars of religion (1648) and before the beginning of the war of the French revolution (1792), commercial wars occupy the foreground. Such economic alliances as are entered into in these treaties generally unite states which, by reason of the very different nature of their land and their different national culture, are adapted to production of very different kinds, and which, at the same time, have a common political interest.[A2-6-4] Each party here agrees with the other to give a preference to its subjects in trade, to not exceed certain maxima of duties, etc.[A2-6-5]
The art of the negotiator was employed to overreach the other contractant in relation to the balance of trade.[A2-6-6] It was considered a special matter of congratulation to induce a less highly developed nation to abandon the traditional means employed to artificially elevate its industries. Hence it is, that such friendly treaties frequently contained the germs of the bitterest enmity.[A2-6-7] A popular remnant of this second group has been noticeable even in recent times, when in diplomatic negotiations concerning the reciprocal modification of duties, it was considered an overreaching and even as an outrage, in case one state made more "concessions" than it received:[A2-6-8] evidently, a confusion of the producers of the industry in question with the whole nation.
C. Free-trade treaties, intended to pave the way to the general freedom of trade.[A2-6-9] Two provisions especially are characteristic here: putting the subjects of the other party on an equal footing with those of the home country in what relates to the ship-duties, etc.;[A2-6-10] and the promise that the products of the other party, as regards import duties, shall be treated like those of the most favored nation.[A2-6-11] [A2-6-12] Whether this preparation for the universal freedom of trade is better made through the medium of an international treaty or of national legislation cannot be answered generally.[A2-6-13] Besides, in our day, the preference of one foreign nation would be easily evaded through the perfection of the modern means of communication.
[A2-6-1] The treaty of commerce between England and Morocco, of the 9th of December, 1856, specially covenants that the countrymen of a debtor shall not be held responsible for debts in the creation of which they had no part; that between England and Mexico, in 1826, guaranties, among other things, that prices shall be freely determined between buyers and sellers (art. 8), freedom from compulsory loans, and from forced conscription for military duty (10), the exercise of one's religion, and the inviolability of graves (13); things which were not yet matters of course in Mexico! Similar agreements between Spain and England in 1667; between Spain and Holland in 1648 and 1713; and even in 1786, between England and France. Commercial treaties of this kind are found very early and very frequently among the ancients. Compare the Arcadian-Ægean in Pausan, VIII, 5, 5, which strongly recalls the Russo-English trade over Archangel; further, Corp. Inscr. Gr., II, No. 1793, 2053 b and c, 2056, 2447 b, 2675-78, 3523. That in the suburbs of Jerusalem, from Solomon to Josias, places where Astarte[TN 129] etc. was worshipped, were maintained unhindered, depends, it is said, on commercial treaties with the Phœnicians, Moabites, Ammonites. (Movers, Phönikier, III, 1, 121 ff., 206 seq.)