From the example of Venice (so far as it may be adduced againsta protective commercial policy at the present time) neither morenor less can be inferred than this -- that a single city or a smallstate cannot establish and maintain such a policy successfully incompetition with great states and kingdoms; also that any powerwhich by means of a protective policy has attained a position ofmanufacturing and commercial supremacy, can (after she has attainedit) revert with advantage to the policy of free trade.
In the argument before adverted to, as in every other wheninternational freedom of trade is the subject of discussion, wemeet with a misconception which has been the parent of much error,occasioned by the misuse of the term 'freedom.' Freedom of trade isspoken of in the same terms as religious freedom and municipalfreedom.Hence the friends and advocates of freedom feel themselvesespecially bound to defend freedom in all its forms.And thus theterm 'free trade' has become popular without drawing the necessarydistinction between freedom of internal trade within the State andfreedom of trade between separate nations, notwithstanding thatthese two in their nature and operation are as distinct as theheaven is from the earth.For while restrictions on the internaltrade of a state are compatible in only very few cases with theliberty of individual citizens, in the case of international tradethe highest degree of individual liberty may consist with a highdegree of protective policy.Indeed, it is even possible that thegreatest freedom of international trade may result in nationalservitude, as we hope hereafter to show from the case of Poland.Inrespect to this Montesquieu says truly, 'Commerce is neversubjected to greater restrictions than in free nations, and neversubjected to less ones than in those under despoticgovernment.'(10*)NOTES:
1.De l'Ecluse, Florence et ses Vicissitudes, pp.23, 26, 32, 163,213.
2.Pechio, Histoire de l'Economie Politique en Italie.
3.Amalfi contained at the period of her prosperity 50,000inhabitants.Flavio Guio, the inventor of the mariner's compass,was a citizen of Amalfi.It was the sack of Amalfi by the Pisans(1135 or 1137) that that ancient book was discovered which later onbecame so injurious to the freedom and energies of Germany -- thePandects.
4.Hence Charles V was the destroyer of commerce and industry inItaly, as he was also in the Netherlands and in Spain.He was theintroducer of nobility by patent, and of the idea that it wasdisgraceful for the nobility to carry on commerce or manufactures-- an idea which had the most destructive influence on the nationalindustry.Before his time the contrary idea prevailed; the Medicicontinued to be engaged in commerce long after they had becomesovereign rulers.
5."Quand les nobles, au lien de verser leur sang pour la patrie,au lieu d'illustrer l'etat par des victoires et de l'agrandir pardes conquetes, n'eurent plus qu'a jouir des honneurs et a separtager des impots on dut se demander pourquoi il y avait huit ouneuf cents habitants de Venice qui se disaient proprietaries detoute la Republique." (Daru, Histoire de Venise, vol.iv.ch.
xviii.)
6.Esprit des Lois, p.192.
7.A mere charlatan, Marco Brasadino, who professed to have the artof making gold, was welcomed by the Venetian aristocracy as asaviour.(Daru, Histoire de Venise, vol.iii.ch.xix.)8.Venice, as Holland and England subsequently did, made use ofevery opportunity of attracting to herself manufacturing industryand capital from foreign states.Also a considerable number of silkmanufacturers emigrated to Venice from Luces, where already in thethirteenth century the manufacturer of velvets and brocades wasvery flourishing, in consequence of the oppression of the Lucchesetyrant Castruccio Castracani.(Sandu, Histoire de Venise, vol.i.
pp.247-256.)
9.Sismondi, Histoire des Republiques Italiennes, Pt.I, p.285.
10.Esprit des Lois, livre xx.ch.xii.
