Commerce. This word signifies, in its most general meaning, a "reciprocal communication." It is used in particular for the communication by which men exchange the products of their land and their industry.

Infinite Providence, the creator of nature, intended to make men dependent on each other through the diversity of this nature. The Supreme Being forged the bonds of commerce in order to incline the peoples of the earth to keep peace with each other and to love each other, and in order to gather to himself the tribute of their praise; and He revealed His love and His greatness by giving them knowledge of the marvels with which He had filled the universe. Thus human intentions and passions enter into the unalterable order of eternal decrees.

This interdependence of men through the variety of commodities they can furnish each other extends both to their real and their conventional needs. [3]

The commodities of a country consist of the natural products of its land, its rivers, its seas, as well as of the labor of its inhabitants.

The products of the land, in the form in which we receive them from the hands of nature, are classed under agriculture. See Agriculture.

The products of labor are infinitely varied. They can, however, be grouped in two classes.

When labor is applied to perfecting the products of the land or to transforming them, it is called manufacture. See Manufacture.

The materials used in manufacture are called raw materials. See Raw materials.

When labor creates out of its own resources and uses no other material than the study of nature, it falls within the category of the liberal arts. See Art.

The products of the rivers and seas belong under fishery. See Fishery.

Food and clothing constitute our only real needs. The idea of comfort comes to men only as a consequence of this first urge, just as luxury is in its turn a consequence of comparing our condition with the superfluous comforts enjoyed by other individuals.

Commerce owes its origin to these three types of needs or necessities to which men have subjected themselves. Industry is at one and the same time the outgrowth of these needs and their support. Everything that one man can pass on to another for his use or his pleasure is part of the substance of commerce; it is only right to give the equivalent of what one receives. Exchange is the essence of commerce. Its general purpose is to bring about an abundance of the materials required for our necessities and our comfort. Its effect is to provide those engaged in it with the means of satisfying their needs.

Mankind is scattered over the earth, and universal communication presupposes navigation, the art of crossing the seas which separate men. This gives rise to a new type of industry and work among men. See Navigation.

Since men agreed that gold and silver should represent merchandise, and subsequently invented a substitute for these metals, gold and silver as well became merchandise. This type of commerce is called commerce in money, or exchange. See Exchange.

Resourceful nations which have not found within their boundaries what they require for the three types of needs have acquired land in climates suited for the commodities they lacked. They have sent their own subjects to cultivate these commodities, at the same time compelling them to consume the products of the mother country. Such establishments are called colonies. See Colony.

Thus agriculture, manufacture, the liberal arts, fishery, navigation, colonies, and exchange constitute seven branches of commerce. Some are more productive than others but everything they produce is precious.

When commerce is considered in relation to a body politic, its operation consists in the internal circulation of the products of the country and its colonies, in the export of their surplus and the import of foreign products, sometimes for the purpose of consumption, sometimes for re-export.

When commerce is considered as an occupation carried on by a citizen of the body politic, its object is to make a profit and its operation consists in the purchase, sale, or exchange of merchandise needed by others.

We shall examine commerce from these two specific points of view, but first it would be well to become acquainted with the manner in which it has become established in the world, as well as with the various revolutions it has experienced.

This general notion of commerce is evidence that commerce must have existed from the time when the earth was first inhabited. The division of labor among these early inhabitants constitutes its first epoch.

Cain cultivated the land, Abel herded the flocks, later Tubalcain shaped iron and bronze. These various arts imply barter.

In the earliest times trade took the form of barter. This means that a certain quantity of one commodity was held to be the equivalent of a certain quantity of another. All men were equal and each one produced by his work the equivalent of the help he expected from others. During those years of innocence and peace men thought less about fixing the value of the goods of exchange, than about helping each other.

Before and after the Flood exchange must have increased together with the population. Then the abundance or scarcity of certain products, whether produced by art or by nature, increased or reduced the equivalent needed for them. Barter thus became difficult.

This drawback became even greater as commerce increased, after the birth of societies had resulted in different types of property and modified the absolute equality which used to reign among men. Because of the unequal distribution of property by division among children, as well as differences in terrain, in strength, and in industriousness, some men found themselves with a greater surplus than others. Those who needed this surplus had to pay for it either by means of work or by inventing new commodities. Yet the use of this surplus remained limited as long as men were content with the simple things in life.

From injustice arose the need for legislators. Trust created judges, respect made them stand out above others, and soon fear separated them from their fellow men. Pomp and circumstance formed one of the prerogatives of these powerful men; whatever was scarce was reserved for their use and luxury appeared. Those who were inferior made luxury the object of their ambition, for men like to outshine each other. Greed stimulated industry; men traveled far and wide or used their powers of invention in order to obtain a few unnecessary goods. Thus, extreme inequality among men extended even to their needs.

Barter became a practical impossibility. It was agreed to give a common measure to all merchandise. Gold, silver, and copper were selected to represent commodities. From then on there existed two kinds of wealth: natural wealth, by which we mean the products of agriculture and industry, and conventional wealth or specie.

This change did not alter the nature of commerce which continued to consist in the exchange of a commodity either for another commodity or for specie. This can be considered the second epoch of commerce.

Asia, the cradle of mankind, was peopled long before the other parts of the world became known. It was also the first to present the spectacle of commerce, of large empires, and of a degree of luxury that seems overwhelming when compared to ours.

The vast conquests made by the Assyrians in those rich regions, the luxury of their kings, and the marvels of Babylon all vouch for a high degree of perfection in the arts. This indicates the existence of a varied commerce, which seems, however, to have extended only to those particular states and their products.

The Phoenicians, inhabitants of a small region in Syria, were the first who dared to cross the barrier that the seas placed in the way of their greed, and to take possession of commodities from every people in order to acquire a surplus.

The riches of the Orient, Africa, and Europe were gathered in Tyre and Sidon, whence their ships carried into every region the surplus of other regions. The Phoenicians were in a way only the brokers of this commerce since they furnished very few products of their own. Such commerce must be distinguished from the commerce of nations that trade in their own commodities. This is called carrying trade [4] and has been practiced by almost all the seafaring peoples of ancient times.

Through the ports of Elath and Esiongaber on the Red Sea the Phoenicians opened up commerce with the eastern coast of Africa, which abounds in gold, and with Arabia which is so famous for its perfumes. Their colony of Tyle, on an island in the Persian Gulf, shows us that they had extended their trade as far as that coast.

Through this navigation of the Mediterranean they established colonies ( see Colony) on all its islands, as well as in Greece and along the coast of Africa and in Spain.

The discovery of this last country provided them with the principal source of their riches: it furnished them with cotton, wool, fruit, iron, and lead. The gold and silver mines of Andalusia gave them first call on the products of every country as well as the power to fix their prices.

They ventured out into the ocean by sailing along the coast and brought tin from the Cassiterides Islands, known today as Great Britain. They even went as far as Thule, which is generally believed to be Iceland. [5]

By its splendor and its commerce Tyre eclipsed all the other Phoenician cities. Rendered proud by its long prosperity it dared to form an alliance against its former masters. All the forces of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, were barely enough to vanquish the city after a thirteen-year siege. The victor was only able to destroy its walls and buildings; the most precious possessions had been transported to an island lying half a league offshore. There the inhabitants of Tyre founded a new city which because of its active commerce soon acquired a greater name than the old city ever had.

Carthage, a colony of Tyre, followed more or less the same development and extended its power along the Western coast of Africa. It became a conquering nation in order to increase its trade which it would share only with its mother city.

In the meantime Greece, through its industry and its population, came to rank among the powerful nations. The Persian invasion made Greece aware of its strength and its superior qualities. Its navy, in turn, made it a threat to the masters of Asia. However, Greece was so preoccupied with internal divisions or with glorious projects that it did not strive to extend its commerce.

The commerce of Athens, the most powerful of the maritime cities of Greece, was almost entirely limited to procuring goods for its own needs from Greece itself and from the Black Sea. Corinth, due to its location, became the storehouse for merchandise from Asia and Italy, yet its own merchants did not attempt any distant sea voyages. Nevertheless Corinth grew rich, not so much because of its industriousness as the fact that the other Greeks were indifferent to commerce, for which this city offered particular advantages.

When the inhabitants of Phocea, a colony of Athens, were driven out of their country, they founded Marseilles on the southern coast of Gaul. This new republic was forced, by the barrenness of its territory, to engage in fishery and in commerce, in which it prospered. It even became a threat to Carthage and vigorously repulsed the attacks of that city.

Then Alexander appeared. He preferred to be the leader of the Greeks rather than their master. With him at their head they founded a new empire on the ruins of Persia. His conquests gave rise to the third epoch of commerce.

Four great events mark the revolution which commerce underwent during the reign of this prince.

He destroyed the city of Tyre and with it the sea trade of Syria.

After he had conquered it, Egypt, which up to then had been self-sufficient and hostile to strangers, entered into communication with other nations.

The discovery of the Indies and of the sea that lies to the South opened up commerce with that country.

Alexandria was built at the gates of Egypt. It became the key to trade with the Indies and the center of commerce in the western world.

After Alexander's death the Ptolemys, his successors in Egypt, assiduously continued his designs. They were successful, thanks to their fleets on the Red Sea and the Mediterranean.

While these revolutions were taking place, Rome was laying the foundation for an even vaster dominion.

The small trading republics gained support from their alliance with Rome against Carthage, whose maritime empire they were covertly undermining. Common interest bound all of them together.

One of these was Rhodes, already famous for its commerce and even more for the wisdom of its laws concerning seafaring. Marseilles, an old ally of the Romans, was of great help to them with its colonies in Spain; it was in turn supported by the Romans and continually increased its wealth and influence up to the time when it was forced to take sides in the civil wars and lost its freedom. When it fell, Arles, Narbonne, and the other Roman colonies in Gaul divided up its commerce.

At last the genius of Rome carried the day and the commerce of Carthage was buried under its ruins. Soon Spain, Greece, Asia, and Egypt, one after the other, became Roman provinces. But the mistress of the world scorned to gain riches in any other way except by the tributes she exacted from the conquered nations. She was satisfied to foster the commerce of those nations that engaged in it under her protection. She kept up shipping in order to import grain from Africa, but this can only be regarded as an administrative matter.

Thus the transfer of the seat of the empire to Byzantium scarcely changed the commerce of Rome; but the location of Byzantium, which was rebuilt by Constantine on the narrows of the Hellespont, made it a very important commercial center. This commerce endured for a long time under the Greek emperors and it was spared even by the Turkish policy of destruction.

The fourth epoch of commerce begins with the fall of the Western empire by the invasion of tribes from the north and of the Saracens.

Commerce like the other arts disappeared under the yoke of barbarism. Almost everywhere it was reduced to such limited circulation of goods as is indispensable in any inhabited country. Italy, where seafaring continued to survive, became its refuge. This country alone carried on the commerce of Europe.

Venice, Genoa, Pisa, Florence vied for dominion of the seas and for supremacy in manufacture. For a long time they competed in carrying on trade with Morea, the Levant, the Black Sea, and, by way of Alexandria, with India and Arabia. The Egyptian caliphs tried in vain to deflect commerce from this city to Cairo; they could only create obstructions. Under the Mameluks Alexandria recovered its rights which it still enjoys today.

The West continued to be dependent on Italian merchants. Every country received from them the very cloth for which it had supplied them the raw material. The Sicilians lost part of this commerce because they did not have the courage to increase it. They had kept the system of the Egyptians and the Romans, which was not to extend their voyages beyond one year. As they sailed farther north it became impossible for them to return as frequently to their ports of origin. They chose Flanders to store their merchandise. As a result, all the goods the Italians obtained from other countries were to be found there. The fairs of Flanders became the general headquarters for commerce with the North, with Germany, England, and France. Necessity created short-range shipping, which increased steadily between these countries. The Flemings, a populous nation already rich in the natural products of its territory, undertook to make use of the wool, flax, and hemp of England, following the example of Italy. By about 960, cloth and linen were manufactured in Flanders. The franchises that Baudouin the Younger, Count of Flanders, granted to this industry encouraged it to such a degree that these new manufactures destroyed all others in the western world. Italy made up for this loss by producing silk, which it undertook successfully as early as 1130, and by retaining trade with Haifa, the Levant, and Alexandria, which kept up her shipping. Flanders, however, became the center of exchange for Europe. As communication increased between the various states of Europe, men looked farther afield and commerce everywhere took on new strength.

In 1164 the city of Bremen joined with several others for mutual support in their trade with Livonia. [6] The form and early successes of this association gave promise of such advantages that all the cities of Germany which carried on some commerce decided to join. By 1206 there were sixty-two of them, from Narva in Livonia to the Rhine, known as Hanseatic towns. See Hanse.

Several cities of the Netherlands, France, England, Portugal, Spain, and Italy became members of this group. At this time the Teutonic Hanse carried on almost the entire foreign trade of Europe.

In most states the domestic trade was still in the hands of a wandering people who were the object of a hatred that bordered on inhumanity. The Jews, who were by turns banished and recalled, according to the needs of the princes, sought recourse, as early as 1181, in the invention of bills of exchange, in order to keep their wealth out of reach of greed and confiscation. See Bill of Exchange.

This new device for representing the common measure of all merchandise facilitated trade. Since that time it has constituted another branch of commerce. See Exchange.

At the very time when the power of the Hanse rivaled even the power of princes, the Counts of Flanders frightened away industry by revoking its franchises in 1301. The Dukes of Brabant attracted it by the same means which Baudouin the Younger had used in Flanders, and then lost it again by acting as unwisely as the successors of this count. In 1404, after the uprising of Louvain, its workers scattered throughout Holland and England. Other Flemish workers followed them, and this marked the beginning of the famous manufactures of Great Britain.

The method of salting herring that had been invented in 1400 continued to keep commerce alive for a while in Bruges and Sluys.

In the course of this century Amsterdam and Antwerp rose to prominence by means of commerce. In 1420 the Portuguese, using the compass, which had already been perfected ( see Compass), established important trading posts on the west coast of Africa. The sailors of Dieppe had carried on some trade in this region as early as 1364 but our wars with the English caused us to lose the fruits of that discovery. By 1480 France had become more peaceful and that year witnessed the first manufacture of silk in Tours. Had it not been for the Italian wars, which were followed by even greater misfortunes, it is probable that our nation would from then on have occupied the place in commerce to which its industriousness and the fertility of its soil entitles it.

Bruges continued to outshine all the other commercial cities of western Europe with its prosperity. This came to an end in 1487 when the city revolted against its prince. Its ruin sealed the greatness of Antwerp and Amsterdam, but of the two Antwerp gained first place, thanks to its favorable location.

Two great events changed the face of commerce and made the end of the century famous. Here begins the fifth epoch of commerce in which its history forms part of the history of states.

In 1487 Bartolomeu Diaz, a Portuguese captain, rounded the Cape of Good Hope and opened up the route to the East Indies. He was followed by Vasco da Gama who conquered the peninsulas lying on each side of the Ganges. Lisbon became the exclusive storehouse for the spices and rich products of these regions, which were redistributed through Antwerp.

Egypt, which limited its navigation to the nearest shores of the Indian Ocean, was not in a situation to withstand the competition of the Portuguese. The decrease in Egyptian commerce brought about the downfall of Italian commerce.

In 1492 Christopher Columbus, a Genoese, discovered America for the king of Castile, whose subjects rushed in vast numbers to conquer the treasures of this new world. The Spaniards, being the first to inhabit America, gained the largest and richest possessions.

In 1501 Alvares Cabra, a Portuguese captain, was shipwrecked on the coast of Brazil, and this gave his country possession of this vast region and its mines.

These two nations neglected their agriculture and the arts in Europe in order to reap a harvest of gold and silver in the new provinces. They were convinced that they would become the masters of the world through possession of these two metals, which are the measure of all things. They have learned since that money necessarily passes into the hands of those who have commodities for sale.

Soon the French made discoveries in the northern half of America. In 1504 our sailors discovered the great bank of Newfoundland, and in the course of that century Basques, Bretons, and Normans took possession of several countries in the name of our kings. Yet France, divided against herself by religious wars, remained insensible to any other feeling than that of its own suffering.

The freedom of conscience and the franchises enjoyed by the Netherlands and especially by the city of Antwerp had attracted an infinite number of Frenchmen and Germans for whom commerce was the only way of making a living in this foreign country. Commercial activity in these provinces was boundless until Philip II interfered by introducing new taxes and the Inquisition.

This resulted in a general uprising. Seven provinces united to defend liberty and in 1579 they formed a federal republic.

At the same time that Spain was making war on its subjects, its prince in 1580 seized the right of succession to Portugal and its possessions. This action, which seemed to augment the strength of the kingdom, has since proved the salvation of its enemies.

In the meantime the Dutch, who were confined to a barren land and were suffering the horrors of war, had to husband their resources in order to provide for their needs. Fishing, which provided them with their livelihood, had enabled them to establish important shipping routes from the northernmost to the southernmost parts of Europe. They even traded with Spain under foreign flags. At that moment two events concurred to further their commerce.

The Spaniards seized Antwerp in 1584 and closed the Scheldt so as to divert commerce to the other cities in Flanders. This policy benefited only their enemies; Holland was now the only country to derive profit from fishing, shipping, and the manufacture of linen and woolens. The manufacture of silk goods passed to England where up to that time there had been none.

The decline of the Teutonic Hanse was the second event that benefited the Dutch. From 1428 when it launched an expedition against Erik, king of Denmark, the power of the Hanse declined imperceptibly. The princes felt a certain jealousy in seeing their chief cities members of such a formidable association and forced them to withdraw from it. Thereafter the Hanse was limited to the cities of Germany. England revoked its privileges under Queen Mary, and as early as 1588 the English, under Queen Elizabeth, succeeded in trading in northern Europe; even Hamburg opened its port to them. Dissension arose between the associated cities. In spite of their ineffectual protests, the English penetrated the Baltic Sea and ever since have shared that trade with the Dutch, to the almost complete exclusion of all other nations. Today there are only six Hanseatic towns left, of which four still have quite a considerable commercial activity in northern Europe. In their trade with southern Europe they are thwarted at every turn by the Dutch. The only reason they retain any share in it is due to the clash of political interests in Europe.

The closing of the ports of Spain and Portugal to the subjects of the United Provinces brought both their despair and their fortune to the highest point. In 1594 and 1595 four ships left Texel in order to bring back from India, in the face of innumerable dangers, those commodities of which the Provinces had been entirely deprived. These wily republicans were still too weak to be anything else but peaceful merchants, and they made common cause with the Indian kings, who were groaning under the imperious yoke of the Portuguese. It was in vain that the latter used force and trickery against their new competitors, nothing could deter them. The first use that the Dutch company made of its wealth was to turn around and attack its rivals. This gave it possession of Amboina and the other Moluccas by 1605. The Dutch by now had the trade in the principal spices firmly in their hands. Their further conquests were immense and rapid, they despoiled the Portuguese and even the Indians, who soon found these allies to be harsher masters.

Other Dutch traders had undertaken just as successfully to share in the Portuguese trade with Africa. A twelve-year truce concluded in 1609 between Spain and the United Provinces gave the latter time to increase and strengthen its commerce in all parts of the world. As early as 1612 it obtained very advantageous capitulations in the Levant.

The Dutch made new conquests with the resumption of the war in 1621. A new trading association, called the Company of the West Indies, seized a part of Brazil, Curaçao, and Saint Eustatius and captured incalculable prizes from the Spanish and Portuguese trade as well.

Portugal, which was the victim of a quarrel in which it had no part, freed itself in 1640 from Spanish rule. John IV, the legitimate heir to the Portuguese crown, concluded a truce with the Dutch in 1641. This truce was not well observed by either side and it cost the Portuguese their remaining possessions on the island of Ceylon where cinnamon grows. They retained only a small number of unimportant posts in India, some of which they have since lost. They fared better in Africa where they were able to recapture a number of their posts. In America they were completely successful: the Dutch were driven out of the whole of Brazil.

The Dutch were more interested in trade with the Indies. They established a sizeable settlement on the Cape of Good Hope, which was the key to this trade. In America they retained as important posts only Surinam in Guiana, as well as the islands of Curaçao and Saint Eustatius. These colonies have little value agriculturally, but they are centers of a lively trade with foreign colonies.

While the Dutch were fighting in Europe in order to have a homeland, and in India in order to rule over it, England had accumulated wealth in a less conspicuous and perilous fashion. Its manufacture of woolens provided it, like the Dutch, with a lucrative commerce. This rapidly brought its navy to a height of power against which all the forces of Spain could not prevail, and England became the arbiter of Europe.

By 1599 Queen Elizabeth had formed a company for the East Indian trade. But its prosperity did not inspire it with any design for conquest: The company peacefully established various trading posts and the state took on the responsibility of protecting these with its squadrons.

Although England had taken possession of Virginia in 1584 and wrested Jamaica from the Spaniards in 1596, it was not until the middle of the seventeenth century that it established large settlements in America. The southern half was occupied by the Spaniards and the Portuguese, who were too strong to be driven out. The English, however, did not seek mines; they were content to derive benefit from the mines of the other two nations by selling these nations their manufactured goods. What they did seek was to increase their industry by opening up new markets. Another objective was to help their own fisheries and shipping. North America was more suited to these designs. They overran it and did not encounter much resistance when they deprived the French of territory that was not being put to any use.

In France, Cardinal Richelieu took advantage of the first moments of public tranquillity in order to turn his attention to the acquisition of colonies and the development of commerce. In 1626, by his efforts, a company was formed for the settlement of Saint Christopher and the other Caribbean islands, from the tenth to the thirtieth degree above the equator. In 1628 another company was given the task of settling New France, from the borders of Florida to the Arctic Pole. But this powerful genius could not free himself from the intrigues of the court and never had the time to follow through the vast projects he had conceived for the good of the kingdom. It is nevertheless to these uncertain beginnings that France owes the preservation of its commerce, for they gave it control of those possessions which it still retains in America, [7] except for Louisiana, which was not discovered until the end of the century.

The English, and even more the Dutch, were for a long time the only ones to profit from the new colonies. The colonies in their turn received help from these countries in setting up their own agriculture. The year 1664 properly marks the beginning of our commerce. The great influence on the affairs of Europe which it gave to France makes this date the point of departure of a sixth epoch in the general history of commerce.

Louis XIV bestowed the character of greatness on all that surrounded him. His skill made him choose Colbert, in whom he had complete confidence, and Colbert was successful in all he undertook. Manufacture, shipping, all the arts were within a few years carried to a point of perfection that astounded and alarmed Europe. The colonies were settled and their commerce reserved exclusively for their overlord. The merchants of England and Holland saw the French enter into competition with them everywhere. But they had a longer tradition and remained superior to us. Because they had greater experience they foresaw that commerce would become the basis for political interests and the balance of power. Thus, to them commerce became a science as well as their chief concern, at a time when we only thought to imitate their operations without discerning the underlying principle. Although we lacked an understanding of the principles of commerce, the activity of our industry made up for this, until the revocation of the Edict of Nantes brought about its decline because of the loss of a great number of subjects; these were well received in every land that was dedicated to the pursuit of wealth. Never has a greater sacrifice been offered to religion.

Since that time every state in Europe has had its commercial interests and has sought to extend them in proportion to its own strength and that of its neighbors. Only France, England, and Holland contend for world commerce.

France, endowed by nature with a considerable surplus, seems to engage particularly in luxury trade.

England, although very rich, still fears poverty or pretends to fear it. This nation neglects no kind of profit, no means by which it can provide for the needs of other nations: it would like to be the only one to provide for others, while at the same time continually reducing its own needs.

Holland, through the exclusive sale of spices, makes up for the mediocrity of its other natural products. Its objective is to purchase cheaply the products of every people and to distribute them profitably. Holland, more than any other state, is jealous of foreign competition, because its commerce maintains itself only through the destruction of the commerce of other nations.

The history of commerce presents us with three important reflections:

1. We have seen nations make up through industry for the lack of agricultural products and thus possess more conventional wealth than those with natural wealth. However, this has always been achieved by distributing to every country the natural wealth it lacked. On the other hand, no nation has been able without industry to possess an abundance of gold and silver, which constitute conventional wealth.

2. A nation that does not engage in commerce to its full capacity faces a gradual commercial decline. Every branch of commerce supposes the existence of a need, whether real or conventional; profit from such commerce provides the means for engaging in a new enterprise; and nothing is as dangerous as to force other nations to provide for their needs themselves, or to find a substitute for these needs. The wonders of industry have always been found to spring from necessity. The great efforts aroused by necessity can be compared to the course of an impetuous torrent whose waters beat violently against the restraining dikes until they finally break through and spread over the plain.

3. A large population follows inseparably upon an extensive commerce, since its transactions are always characterized by great wealth. It is well known that the comforts of life are the most powerful lure for men. If we imagine a trading nation surrounded by nations that do not engage in commerce, we shall find that the former will soon have attracted all the foreigners for whom its commerce can provide work and wages.

These three reflections give us the principles of commerce for any particular body politic. Agriculture and industry are the essence of commerce; they are so closely linked that if one should prevail over the other, both would be destroyed. Without industry the fruits of the land will be of no value; if agriculture is neglected, the well springs of commerce dry up.

The purpose of commerce in any state is to keep the greatest possible number of men in comfortable circumstances by means of their work. Agriculture and industry are the only means of subsistence; as long as they both bring advantages to those who engage in them, there will never be a lack of manpower in the state.

The effect of commerce is to endow a body politic with all the strength of which it is capable. This strength consists in population, which is drawn to the body politic by political wealth, both real and relative.

The real wealth of a state consists in its capacity to provide for its needs with a maximum degree of independence from other states, as well as in the maximum surplus that it has available for export. Its relative wealth is determined by comparing the quantity of conventional wealth it derives from commerce with the quantity commerce brings to neighboring states. The art and the science of administering political commerce lies in combining real and relative riches.

Whenever a state engages in commercial transactions contrary to these principles, commerce itself is destroyed.

Thus, there is a useful and a useless type of commerce. We shall see the truth of this if we distinguish the merchant's gain from the gain of the state. If a merchant imports foreign merchandise that reduces the consumption of domestically manufactured goods, he himself will profit from the sale of this merchandise, but the state will lose: (1) the cost of the purchase abroad; (2) the wages that the use of domestically manufactured goods would have provided for various workmen; (3) the value the raw material would have yielded if grown on the land of the nation or its colonies; (4) the benefit from the circulation of all these sums, that is to say, the prosperity in which other subjects would have shared; (5) the income the prince has a right to expect from the prosperity of his subjects.

In the case of raw materials grown in the colonies, the state will lose profit from shipping as well if they do not come from its own colonies. In the case of foreign raw materials, the state will still experience this loss, and furthermore, while it will not lose the yield from its lands, it will lose the exchange value of the domestic merchandise that had to be provided in return for these raw materials. The possible gain of the state consists, therefore, precisely of all the items that we have listed as losses in the hypothesis above, while the merchant's gain lies only in the excess of the sale price over the purchase price.

On the other hand, it can happen that the merchant loses while the state gains. If a trader rashly sends merchandise from his country into another where it does not command a ready market, he may lose on the sale. The state, however, will still gain the sum paid by the foreign buyer, as well as the money paid to the landowner for the raw materials, the wages of the workers who manufactured the merchandise, the cost of shipping if the export took place by sea, the benefit of having money circulate, and the tax that public affluence owes to the nation.

The profit the merchant makes on his dealings with the other subjects is of no concern to the state since it does not share in it. On the other hand, such profit does concern the state if it increases the indebtedness of foreigners and furthers other enterprises from which the nation stands to gain.

Before examining how legislators succeed in having commerce fulfill its purpose, I shall set down the nine principles which the English, the nation most knowledgeable about commerce, propose in their books as the criteria for judging the useful or deleterious effect of commercial operations.

1. Export of its surplus is the best means for a nation to gain a clear profit.

2. The best way of exporting the surplus products of the land is to export them in a semifinished or manufactured state.

3. It is a great saving in money to import raw materials from abroad and use them for manufacture rather than to procure them in a semifinished state.

4. The exchange of one kind of merchandise for another is generally advantageous, unless it runs counter to these principles.

5. A nation is inevitably ruined by the import of merchandise that prevents the consumption of domestic products or interferes with the progress of its manufactures and its agriculture.

6. The import of purely luxury items is an actual loss for the state.

7. The import of prime necessities cannot be considered an evil; nevertheless it impoverishes the nation.

8. The import of foreign merchandise that is then re-exported brings in a clear profit.

9. Carrying the freight of other nations on one's ships is a profitable form of commerce.

The overall operation of commerce must be guided according to this plan.

We have already defined this operation as consisting in the domestic circulation of the commodities of a country or its colonies, in the export of their surplus, and in the import of foreign commodities, either for consumption or for re-export.

These definitions lead to a natural division of commerce into two parts, domestic and foreign trade. Their principles differ and any confusion between them leads to great disorder.

Domestic trade is the commerce that members of a society carry on with each other. It occupies the first place in overall commerce, since necessities are prized above superfluities, even though the latter are also very much sought after.

This domestic circulation of goods is produced by the citizens' consumption of the products of their land and their industry. It is the most important support of industry and agriculture. We have already remarked that the real wealth of a nation is at its highest when it does not rely on any other nation for its needs. The regulation of commerce consequently varies in different states according to the abundance of natural wealth. In several nations skill makes up, by means of industry, for the shortcomings of nature.

The value of domestic trade is exactly equal to the sum of the individual expenditures by each citizen for food, lodging, clothing, comfort, and luxuries. However, this value must be reduced by the total consumption of imported commodities which represent a real loss to the nation, unless foreign trade makes up for this.

A flourishing population is the soul of this domestic circulation; its perfection consists in the abundance of domestically produced commodities which must be in proportion to the need; its preservation depends on the profit these commodities bring to their owner, and on the encouragement given by the state.

As long as the land is cultivated as extensively and as well as possible, there cannot be too great a consumption of goods that provide comfort and luxury, provided these goods originate in the country or its colonies.

Their value increases the sum of individual expenditures and is shared by the citizens for whom these expenditures furnish work.

A people should lack none of the amenities of life, because these make it happier. It would no longer be happy, however, if these amenities and comforts exhaust its wealth; as a matter of fact, in that case it would not enjoy them for long, because man's real needs are harsh and impatient creditors. Yet when comforts and luxury are provided by domestic products, the pleasure they give us has several advantages: their lure attracts and tempts foreigners, and provides the state with new material for export.

I should like to extend this principle to the sciences, to the products of man's mind, and to the liberal arts; they are not debased by being considered in the light of their usefulness. Men need instruction and amusement, and when this cannot be supplied domestically, the nation is the poorer by the amount it has to spend abroad. On the other hand, any nation that provides instruction and amusement for others can count the entire income from this as profit.

The most ordinary commodity and the arts that seem most frivolous in the light of reason play an equally essential role in political commerce. Philip II, who owned the mines of Potosi, [8] enacted two decrees during his reign, merely for the purpose of forbidding the entry of dolls, glass beads, combs, and pins, in particular from France.

Fashion and its whims may quite possibly be a sign of a nation's inconstancy and fickleness, nevertheless it is certain that no wiser way can be found to foster the nation's commerce and the circulation of its money. Folly consists only in becoming slaves to fashion when one's wealth does not permit it. It is not to forego fashion and display, but to protest against their existence that is truly ridiculous.

Nevertheless it is by no means impossible to carry luxury too far. Excessive luxury would be marked by the abandonment of the land and those arts that supply us with the prime necessities, by the cultivation of less useful crops and the practice of less useful arts.

The legislator always has it in his power to control such excesses by correcting their cause: he must know how to keep an equilibrium between the various occupations of his people, how to relieve through franchises and privileges any group that is suffering hardship, and how to shift his taxes onto the domestic consumption of luxury goods.

Domestic trade is subject to the particular laws of the body politic. The latter is free to allow, restrict, or suppress the use of commodities, whether domestic or foreign, when it judges this to be within its interests. It is for this reason that the colonies are always prohibited from engaging freely in trade.

In a word one must never forget that domestic trade serves above all the purpose of maintaining the real wealth of a state.

Foreign trade is the trade that a political society carries on with other societies. This trade serves the same purpose as domestic trade, but its particular object is to procure relative wealth. Indeed, if we suppose that a trading nation possesses very great real wealth in commodities for which other nations find very little use, then its domestic trade will carefully nurture this particular branch of agriculture or industry by encouraging the nation to consume its products. In its foreign trade, on the other hand, this nation will only endeavor to protect this special branch as long as it does not mean sacrificing opportunities to increase the relative wealth of the state. Foreign trade is so closely linked to political interests that it partakes of their nature.

Every prince is in a situation of constraint in relation to other princes. Those who wish to provide their subjects with the possibility of exporting a large quantity of commodities are obliged to take into account the circumstances, principles, and interests of other trading nations, as well as the taste and the whims of the consumer.

Foreign trade consists in providing for the needs of other nations and obtaining from them the commodities that are needed at home. Its perfection is reached by exporting as much as possible in the most profitable manner. Its preservation depends on the manner in which this is carried out.

As we have already stated several times, agricultural and industrial products are the basis of all commerce. When it comes to export, fertile countries necessarily have an advantage over a less fertile one. Furthermore, the more indispensable a country's commodities are and the better their quality, the more other countries will depend on them.

A large population is one of the advantages that enable a nation to provide to the highest degree possible for the needs of other nations. At the same time its foreign trade then gives work to all those whom its domestic trade could not have supported.

The size of the population depends not only on the security of the nation but also on the ease with which the citizens can gain a comfortable living by means of their work. Experience has shown that when they cannot support themselves by their work, they go into other states in order to seek a living. Thus, should extraordinary circumstances cause work to be unprofitable, the legislator takes care to forestall the consequences of such a situation; he provides his workers either with food or work. Since a large population is so necessary, it follows that idleness must be suppressed. Workhouses are the principal remedy used by civilized nations.

A nation will not be able to export anything unless it offers its commodities as cheaply as other nations which have the same commodities. If it sells for less, its commodities will enjoy preference even within the borders of the other nations.

Four conditions infallibly produce this: competition, the economical use of labor, reasonable export costs, and a low interest rate.

Competition produces abundance, which in turn lowers the cost of food, raw materials, artisans' wages, and money. Competition is one of the most important principles of commerce and a significant factor in its freedom. Anything that obstructs this freedom or impairs it by changing one of the four conditions, has a disastrous effect on the state and is diametrically opposed to the purpose of the state, which is to promote the happiness and prosperity of the greatest possible number of men.

The economical use of labor consists in replacing human labor by machines and animals, whenever this can lower the costs or keep them from rising. Far from reducing the population, this increases it. The false opinion that this does reduce it has persisted longest in countries which had only domestic trade. It is true that where there is little foreign trade, the general purpose could not be attained unless domestic trade and industry kept the greatest possible number of men at work. But when foreign trade, that is, shipping, colonies, and the needs of other nations, can provide work for an even greater number of citizens than there are available, then it is necessary to save labor in order to achieve the best possible results. As we have already stated, experience shows that a nation loses its commerce when it does not engage in all the trade that it could. In a word, it is clear that the strength of a body politic depends on its making the best and most extensive use of its manpower, since this is what brings it political wealth; this relationship must never be forgotten. Thus the economical use of labor will not be detrimental to population, as long as the legislator takes care merely to redirect men's work from one purpose to another; this necessitates special policies.

Reasonable export costs are the third cause of low prices and they enable a country to sell its products.

These costs can be divided into transportation and export duties. Transportation may be by land or by water. It is generally recognized that conveyance by land is infinitely more expensive. Therefore an essential part of the government of trading nations is concerned with the building of canals to compensate for the absence of navigable rivers, with the upkeep and regulation of such navigable rivers as exist, and with exempting this domestic navigation from all charges.

Customs duties ( see Customs), levied on the products of the nation either while they are within its borders or as they leave the country, [9] represent those costs which foreigners accept with the greatest reluctance. The merchant considers that they raise the price beyond the real value of the products, while the policy of the state treats these duties as an increase in relative wealth.

Resourceful nations either abolish these exit duties or keep them in proportion to the need that other nations have of their products. Above all they compare the price of their products by the time they reach the consumer, with the price demanded for these same products by competing nations. This comparison is very important: even though the quality and the purchase price of textiles may be similar in the case of two manufacturing nations, the export duties should not be the same if the cost of transportation differs. The consumer is swayed by the smallest difference in price.

Sometimes, instead of levying duties on export, the legislator encourages it through incentive payments. The object of these payments is to increase the worker's profit when it is not high enough to support a type of work that is useful for purposes of competition. If the payment is high enough to lower the price of the product, the favor it finds abroad will within a few years be enough to establish this new branch of commerce, and soon it will no longer need support. One can be sure of such a result. This practice cannot but be salutary for the whole body politic, just as in the human body one member communicates its warmth to another that has need of it.

If a nation traded only in its own commodities, it would not be supplying others with as many goods as possible. Everyone knows from his own experience that it is natural to purchase one's supplies in the store that has the greatest selection, and everyone knows that needs are created by a varied assortment of merchandise. What is true for an individual business is also true for commerce in general.

When a trading nation lacks a certain commodity, it imports it and then distributes it to the consuming nations. This type of commerce is properly called carrying trade. A nation that is adept at commerce will neglect none of its branches. Even if it carries on a large luxury trade, it will certainly be successful in all branches of commerce as long as it has a large population and a great deal of cheap money. I shall go even further: The moment when its traders find this carrying trade profitable marks the period in which the nation will most surely be rich.

Among the foreign commodities there are some that the legislator has prohibited in domestic trade. As we have noted, however, when it comes to foreign trade, the legislator is not free to act as he wishes.

In order not to deprive the nation of the profit it can derive from foreign merchandise, a profit which increases its relative wealth, some states have established ports where they permit the free import of all commodities which it is profitable to export. These are called free ports. See Free port.

In other states this merchandise is placed in storage. When it is later exported all or part of the entry duty is refunded. This facilitates the general export of foreign commodities, even those which may be sold within the country.

The foreign trade of a nation will not reach its highest perfection unless its surplus is exported and its requirements imported as advantageously as possible.

This export and import will be carried either in its own ships or in those of another nation. See Shipping. It will be conducted either by domestic or by foreign agents. See Agents.

Thus, there exists active and passive commerce. It is clear that passive commerce reduces the profit gained from export and raises the price of import. It is detrimental to the purpose of commerce in the state, since it deprives the nation of work and the means of subsistence. It impedes the effect of commerce by reducing the relative wealth of the state.

Passive commerce results in still another disadvantage: a nation that has taken over the active commerce of another keeps the latter in a state of dependence. Should their union come to an end, the nation that engages only in passive commerce remains bereft of strength: its agriculture, its industry, its colonies languish, its population diminishes until it takes up passive commerce again, and this requires efforts that bring only slow and uncertain improvement.

The difference, over a certain length of time, between the compensation for exports and imports is called the balance of trade. It is always paid out or received in money, since one cannot avoid exchanging commodities against the specie that is their measure, when no other equivalent can be provided. States settle their accounts with each other in the same manner as individuals.

Thus, when the balance of trade of a nation is favorable, its capital fund of conventional wealth increases by the amount of this balance. When it is unfavorable, the capital fund is reduced by the total sum paid out.

This balance of trade can be considered as being specific or general.

A specific balance is the balance of trade between two states. They conclude treaties with each other in order to keep their balance of trade as equal as possible. These treaties regulate the nature of the commodities they may send each other, the measures they will take to facilitate their import, and the duties that will be levied on them either on entry or within the country.

If two nations exported the same kinds of products to each other, they would only need a treaty that insures humanity and the good treatment of persons. For if one nation profited more from the exchange, it would eventually take over the other's foreign and domestic trade; then there would be no more trade between them unless one or the other re-exported the products of a third nation.

Two nations have a perfectly equal share in the commerce between them when there is parity of assets and of the number of men this commerce provides with employment. It is almost impossible for this to occur, and ordinarily only the parity of assets is computed.

It seems, though this is not usually done, that the number of men employed should also be reckoned, in accordance with each country's need for an exchange of goods. If the balance of trade is not equal, the nation profiting from this inequality should pay no attention to any disparity in the number of men employed by each side, for it is certain that the excess it receives in money rather than commodities will increase its domestic circulation of goods and consequently provide a larger number of men with a comfortable living.

If a country is entirely lacking in a certain commodity, the degree of competition existing in this commodity will determine what favorable conditions it should be granted in order to make it a more equal trade partner, since the occasion to sell one's own merchandise will be lost if other nations, which also have this commodity, offer better terms. If the country in question can offer in exchange only merchandise of the same type as the nation's own commodities, other advantages to be gained from this export must be compared with the loss that might result if this trade passed to other countries. This should be followed by an evaluation of the nation's capacity to withstand or to destroy this competition.

Finally, the drawing up of such a treaty requires a thorough knowledge of the commerce of the two nations, of their resources, their population, the price and quality of their raw materials, as well as the cost of food and labor. One has to be familiar with the type of industry to be found, the needs of both nations, the particular and the general balance of trade, their finances, and the rate of interest. Should this rate be low in one nation and high in the other, the latter's loss will be the former's gain. It can happen that in spite of an unfavorable balance of trade it is useful to trade with another country, because such trade may lead to other trade which would make up for the loss and even bring in a profit.

The general trade balance of a nation consists in the losses or gains that result from the adjustment of all the specific balances.

Even when the sum of general exports has decreased, the state will not have lost any useful commerce as long as imports have decreased in the same proportion. Such a decrease usually indicates that the number of men occupied in domestic commerce has grown.

By this same reasoning, if the decrease of imports is greater than the reduction of general exports, an increase in useful commerce has occurred.

It is clear that the nation which continually has the most favorable general balance of trade will become the most powerful. It will have greater conventional wealth, and, as this wealth circulates within the country, it will enable a greater number of citizens to live comfortably. Such is the effect of commerce when it is brought to its point of perfection in the body politic. Those who administer the country strive to bring this about. They succeed if they are farsighted, if they keep a careful watch over the actions, the regulations, and the motives of competing nations, and if they know how to make use of the nation's real and relative wealth. These principles always remain the same although the particular situations vary in the extreme. Only an intelligence that can visualize all the aspects of the problem can apply the principles correctly.

The restrictions to which political interest subjects commerce cannot be called an impediment. Freedom of trade, which is so often invoked and so rarely understood, only refers to the unhindered conduct of such commerce as is consonant with the rightly conceived general interest of society.

Anything beyond this is license and destroys commerce. I spoke of "the rightly conceived general interest," because what may appear advantageous is not necessarily so.

Fraud and bad faith cannot be too severely proscribed. The investigation of such matters requires formal procedures. The excessive use of such procedure destroys freedom, their total neglect opens the door to license. Thus they must be limited rather than completely abolished, and provision must be made for great ease in their execution.

We have already proved the necessity of competition; when this word is rightly understood it is the soul of liberty.

This is one of the most critical parts of governmental administration, but its principles will always conform to the policy which provides the state with a general balance more favorable than that of its neighbors.

We shall now examine commerce from the point of view of the individual citizen, but only insofar as it relates to the body politic.

Since commerce is the soul of the body politic, it is an honest occupation for a citizen, like all occupations which are useful. However, as a citizen renders greater services he must be given more recognition. Commerce will receive no encouragement in those countries that do not make such distinction between citizens.

There are three ways in which one can be engaged in commerce.

The first is to buy the products of the land and of industry in order to resell them in small lots to other citizens. Those who exercise this profession are called retailers. See Retailers.

This occupation is a convenience rather than a necessity for society. It fosters the domestic circulation of goods and money.

The second is carried on by a citizen who by his industriousness undertakes to guide the work of a number of other citizens in order to fashion raw materials. Those who engage in this are called manufacturers. See Manufacturers.

This industry is very necessary because it increases real and relative wealth.

The third consists of the occupation of a citizen who sends abroad the products of his homeland in order to exchange them for other necessary products or for money. This commerce may be carried on by land or by sea, in Europe or in other parts of the world. It is called wholesale commerce. Those who engage in it are called traders. See Trader.

This profession is very essential, because it is the soul of shipping and increases the relative wealth of the state.

These three ways of engaging in commerce all have as their mainspring the duty to act scrupulously in good faith. They also share a common objective, namely profit, but they differ in their consequences; in varying degree they contribute to the general effectiveness of commerce in the body politic. The attention of the nation should be focused on this effectiveness, and each individual esteemed in proportion to his contribution to the overall effectiveness.

Not that the immediate intention of the legislator is to have very powerful traders; he values them because they have already greatly furthered his policies. Yet, in a situation where there is only limited commerce, it would still be more useful to have many traders who are somewhat rich than a smaller number who are very rich. Twenty who each have a hundred thousand écus do more business and together have a larger credit than six millionaires. In addition, fortunes shared among several give an infinitely greater impulse to circulation and real wealth. Nevertheless it is no burden for the state if commerce causes great inequality of wealth, since this inequality causes a circulation of money that ordinarily is to the sole benefit of the useful arts. It is in fact desirable that these large fortunes should not be withdrawn from commerce, since they lead to the establishment of many factors  [10] abroad. These factors foster the growth of the commerce of their nation and moreover bring back with them the profit they have made through whatever commerce is possible in the countries where they live. Such fortunes would not be withdrawn from commerce if the condition of the trader were as honored as it deserves to be.

To find great commercial enterprises willing to engage in government business, the government needs only its credit. As soon as it offers profit and security, sound companies will take over this business at a discount.

To know how to engage in commerce and to know how to direct it are two very different things. To direct it well, one has to know how it is carried on; to engage in it with profit one does not need to know how it should be directed. The science of the trader is concerned with the details of which his business consists. The science of the statesman is concerned with the use that can be made of these details; thus he must be acquainted with the details, and it is only through the traders that he can gain this knowledge. If he wishes to learn, he cannot talk enough with traders; if he is deliberating, he should be very cautious about accepting their advice. We have already differentiated between the merchant's profit and the profit of the state. It is clear that, absorbed as they are in details, traders rarely have an overall perspective, unless they have acquired it through their travels or through extensive and reasoned experience. Those who are in a position to know the circumstances have sure grounds for judging a particular case.

The trader owes the society of which he is a member the sentiments, which any gentleman, that is to say, any true citizen, feels toward the society of which he is a member: submission to its laws and a love that comes first in his heart. Not to live up to this is to be guilty before God and before men, whatever one's profession: those who are continually in a situation where they may easily fail in their duty cannot have this principle too deeply engraved in their hearts.

Yet a trader is not derelict in this exclusive love of his country if he transports from one foreign country to another those commodities needed to round out his stock, even though they may be forbidden by the society to which he belongs. Since these commodities were needed, he clearly contributed to the relative wealth of his country by making a profit that would have accrued to the nation that owned the commodities if it had sold them itself.

I stress this matter particularly in connection with traders living abroad. Sometimes they are criticized for such commerce, and yet quite frequently it is in this way that they have succeeded in gaining first place for their nation in the country in which they live. Such criticism shows that one does not know the principles of commerce well and confuses the principles of foreign with those of domestic trade.

The same can be said of the protection that an individual trader seeks to obtain in a foreign country. If he prefers the protection of a foreign nation, he is a bad citizen, and yet he needs protection.

The subject of commerce is vast. We have only been able to outline the first principles; any man of probity and reflection will easily be able to develop their consequences. For further information the reader may consult the excellent Essai by M. Melon; the Réflexions politiques by M. Dutot, together with the critique of this book; Le parfait négociant; Le Dictionnaire du commerce; L'Esprit des lois;  [11] the regulations and ordinances of France; The statutes of England. These, together with almost all English books on commerce, are the most reliable sources.

Concerning commerce in any particular state, see France, Great Britain, Holland, Spain, Venice, Naples (Geography), Naples (Ancient Geography)], Genoa, The Papal States ( État Ecclésiastique ), Piedmont, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Muscovy.

Notes

1. [Among the other articles by Forbonnais are Change, Compagnie , and Concurrence; Quesnay also contributed Grains; and Turgot wrote Foires et Marchés and Fondation . Unfortunately, limitations of space prevented inclusion of these articles.]

2. [J. A. Schumpeter, A History of Economic Analysis (New York: Oxford University Press, 1954), p. 137.]

3. [The French expressions are besoin réel and besoin d'opinion . The real needs are those man experiences in the state of nature, while the conventional needs (besoins d'opinion) arise as a result of his living in society. A passage from the article Besoin , by Diderot, might serve as a further explanation: "Society makes it easier for men to possess those things for which they feel a natural need, and it renders such possession secure. At the same time, however, society gives men a notion of an infinite number of imaginary needs. These urge them on a thousand times more keenly than real needs, and they make men perhaps even more unhappy when they are gathered together, than they would have been in an isolated existence."]

4. [Forbonnais uses the expression commerce d'œconomie. ]

5. [The French text gives Irlande , but that is certainly a misprint for Islande . The article "Thule" lists Iceland, but not Ireland, among the countries that might originally have been called Thule.]

6. [Today known as Estonia.]

7. [This was written before the Seven Years' War deprived France of most of its North American possessions.]

8. [In Bolivia; these mines were famous for their wealth.]

9. [Under the ancien régime France was divided into several customs areas, and duties were levied on goods passing from one of these to another, as well as on exports and imports.]

10. [I.e., commercial agents.]

11. [Jean-François Melon, Essai politique sur le commerce , 1734. Dutot, Réflexions politiques sur les finances et le commerce , 1736. Melon and Dutot were both disciples of John Law. Melon's Essai , with its defense of luxury, led Voltaire to write Le Mondain . Dutot's work is a reply to Melon. We have not been able to identify the critique ( examen ) mentioned by Forbonnais. Le parfait négociant was a popular handbook of commerce, published in 1675 by Jacques Savary; it was translated into English, German, Dutch, and Italian, and frequently republished throughout the eighteenth century. The Dictionnaire du commerce was first published in 1723 by Savary's son Savary des Brulons and republished several times during the eighteenth century. L'Esprit des lois by Montesquieu was first published in 1748.]