English iron, he obtains for the same money a
hundred-weight of iron, together with some
good woollen stockings (and, by the way, it is
so difficult to get woollen clothing in France,
owing to the high rate of duty imposed on
foreign combed wool, that it is announced, after
an inquiry of the Council of State, that ten
millions of the French are unable to afford
themselves this luxury). Which is the more natural
state of things? That the man who uses the
iron should be fined six shillings for the benefit
of the man who produces it, or that he should
be allowed peaceable possession of his half-
dozen shillings to spend as he pleases—be it in
eau sucrée, in a new hat, or in a journey on the
railway? The national industry must not be
invoked for a doubtful cause. The national
industry is, in the former case, benefited only to
the extent of twelve shillings: for the extra six
shillings make no addition to the national
wealth. Peter is robbed of that sum, to pay
Paul. There is nothing to show for it that
could not equally be shown for the simple twelve
shillings, if the English or Belgian iron were
admitted to market.

It may be replied that in this latter case,
though the Frenchman got his iron a third
cheaper, still the twelve shillings would be paid
out of the country, would be paid to England or
Belgium, and only the six shillings would be
expended in France. But this is quite a
mistake. The debts of a nation are not paid in
gold, but in material. The twelve shillings
would be paid to the Englishman, in silk or in
wine, in bronzes, or in gloves, in furniture, or in
lace. Or, if the debt were actually paid in
money, then the means of paying it must first
have been derived from exports to some other
country. The Frenchman wanting a hundred-
weight of iron would virtually perform an operation
of this sort. He would say to the French
iron-master, "You are too dear for me; with all
my desire to serve you, I must encourage some
other species of industry among my countrymen
which taxes my resources less: I will purchase
silk at Lyons; I will take it to Turin. Although
they make good velvets and silks in Italy, they
have an extraordinary admiration of the French
stuffs, and will give me a good price for my
goods. The price I obtain I will give to the
English merchant for his iron, and I will in effect
exchange French silk for the English metal."
Or again: "It is easier for me to encourage French
millers than French iron-masters. Whether it
is that the millstones of La Brie are wonderfully
good, or that the French wheat being uncommonly
hard is more adapted for fine grinding, I
am not learned enough to tell; but I know that
the English like our flour, and in 1858 bought
from us to the value of a million and a half of
their money. I will offer French flour for
English iron, and I think I study in that way
French interests, while at the same time I have
in my pocket that extra six shillings to devote
to some other species of French industry. I
will invest it in walnut-wood. The English
make guns for all the world, have a large rifle
manufactory at Enfield, but have no walnut-
wood for the stocks of their guns. Towards the
end of last war, the price of this wood rose from
two shillings and three shillings, to eight
shillings and ten shillings, for each stock. I will
encourage with my six shillings the French
walnut-tree plantations, and will exchange it
against lambswool stockings or Sheffield razors."
The Frenchman's argument in this case would
be perfectly sound, though, in a small matter of
fact, he would be reckoning without his host.
It would not be possible for him to export the
walnut-wood for gun-stocks. The French
government, learning that our walnut plantations
are exhausted, and that we have been procuring
our gun-stocks from France, have laid a prohibition
on the export. It is proposed to import
English iron for French gun-barrels; will it also
be proposed to allow the exportation of French
wood for English gun-stocks?

Unfortunately, one cannot in these matters
consider the cases of individuals. It was very
hard for the watermen, when bridges were built
over the Thames. It was very hard for the link-
boys, when the streets were well lighted with gas.
It was very hard for the chairmen, when cabs
came into universal use. It was very hard for
the coachmen, when railroads were established.
It will be very hard for the thousands of Parisian
water-carriers, when Paris is supplied with water
in pipes. The world moves on, forgetful of
individuals, and the point to be chiefly considered
is, what is most for the general good. Now, the
general rule to be laid down with regard to
exports and imports is this, that the cheapening of
any valuable commodity in a particular place, is
a benefit conferred on all places: and that
wealth acquired by my neighbour is not to be
grudged, but is good for me as well as for him.
Take any article of merchandise whatsoever—as
gloves; in the last analysis, each pair of gloves
represents a certain amount of labour, let us
say a day's labour of the artisan. If the French-
man be able, through superiority of climate, or
help of machinery, or by any known means, to
cheapen gloves, to reduce the quantity of labour
which a pair represents, he benefits me, provided
I have the means of exchanging an equivalent
of my labour for his. By employing him to
make the gloves, I do not require to expend so
much of my strength in order to procure a pair.
Half a day is enough, whereas previously a whole
day was necessary. The cheapness thus made
possible in France, is a direct benefit to England
and the world. Suppose the French glove is
one hour, or half an hour cheaper than the
English glove. Multiply this by the three and
a half millions of pairs that find their way from
France to England, and estimate the gain to us
What a gain of hours to what number of
Englishmen does this represent! And in like
manner the wealth of France is a gain to
England, as the wealth of my neighbour is in a
sense also mine. Wealth is nothing if it be not
employed. Superabundant wealth means
superabundant power of purchasing. I must share to
some extent in the good that flows from that