Chapter 28 unusual restrictions on the importation of goods of all kinds from those countries whose balance of trade is considered unfavorable to our country

Section 1 This restriction is unreasonable, even on the principles of mercantilism The second method of increasing the quantity of gold and silver advocated by mercantilism is the extraordinary restriction of the importation of almost all goods from those countries whose balance of trade is considered unfavorable to our country.For example, the fine bamboo cloth of Silesia can be imported into England for its own consumption upon payment of a certain duty; but the fine cotton cloth and fine bamboo cloth of France are forbidden to be imported except in the port of London to be warehoused for export.The wines of France are also imported more heavily than the wines of Portugal, or of any other country.According to the so-called import tax of 1692, all French goods were subject to a duty of twenty-five per cent. of their value; five percent.French wine, brandy, salt, and vinegar are, it is true, excluded, but these commodities are subject to other and onerous taxes, either by other laws, or by special provisions of this statute.In 1696, it was considered that the 25% was not enough to prevent the import of French goods, so it imposed a 25% tax on French goods other than brandy, and at the same time imposed a tax on each barrel of French wine. A new tax of £25 and a new tax of £15 on the barrel of French vinegar.French goods are not subject to those general subsidy duties, or the five per cent. duty, on every or most of the goods enumerated in the provincial duty-free regulations.If one-third subsidy tax and two-thirds subsidy tax are also included as all subsidy taxes to be paid, then there are five types of those subsidy taxes.Therefore, before the beginning of this war, the greater part of the agricultural and manufactures of France, at least seventy-five per cent.But most goods cannot afford such a heavy tax.To tax them so heavily, therefore, is to forbid their importation.France, I believe, imposes similarly heavy taxes on our goods and manufactures, though I do not know how heavy their taxes are.This mutual restriction almost cut off all fair trade between the two countries, so that French goods were transported to England, and British goods to France, mainly by smuggling.The principles which I examined in the previous chapter arose from private interest and monopoly; the principles which I shall examine in this chapter arose from the prejudice and hostility of the nation.Consequently, the principles I examine in this chapter are even less plausible.It is unreasonable even on the principles of mercantilism.

First, even if, as a result of free commerce between England and France, the balance of trade was in favor of France, it cannot be concluded from this that such a trade would be unfavorable to England, nor that the total balance of trade of Great Britain would be due to this. trade would be more detrimental to Britain.If the wine of France is cheaper and better than the wine of Portugal, and the linen cheaper and better than that of Germany, then the wine and foreign linen which England requires will, of course, be bought to France's advantage, and to Portugal's and Germany's disadvantages.The value of the goods imported from France each year will certainly increase greatly, but as the French goods of the same quality are cheaper than those of Portugal and Germany, the value of the whole imported goods must decrease by an amount commensurate with their cheapness. .This is the case even if the French goods imported are wholly consumed in England.

Secondly, A greater part of all the French goods imported are likely to be re-exported to other countries, where they may be traded profitably.This re-export would perhaps bring back a return shipment of a value equal to the original cost of all the French imports.What is often said of the East Indies trade applies also to the French trade, viz., that, though the East Indies goods were purchased for the greater part with gold and silver, the re-export of a part of them brought back to their own country , more than the original cost of the entire shipment.Now, one of the most important trade branches of the Netherlands is to transport French goods to other European countries.Some of the French wine that the English drink is secretly imported from Holland and Zealand.If the trade between England and France were free, or if French goods were imported with the same duties as the rest of Europe, and recovered when exported, England might share in the advantages of that trade which is so favorable to Holland.

Third, we do not have a clear standard by which to judge which country is beneficial to the trade balance between the two countries, that is, which country exports the most value.In matters of this kind, our judgments are often based on the prejudices and hostility of the nation, which are governed by the self-interest of individual businessmen.In this case, people often use two criteria, that is, the tariff increase book and the exchange situation.Owing to the inaccuracy of the greater part of the valuations which the tariff books place upon commodities of all kinds, they are now considered to be very unreliable standards.As for the exchange situation, I am afraid that it is equally unreliable.

When London and Paris exchange at par, it is said to show that London's debts to Paris are exactly offset by Paris's debts to London.On the other hand, the purchase of bills of exchange in Paris, if payment was made in London, was said to show that the debts owed by London to Paris were not offset by the debts owed by Paris to London.Therefore, London must be sent to Paris with a certain difference in currency.Because exporting currency is dangerous and troublesome, and requires payment of fees, the remitter requires remittance, and the remitter must also pay remittance.The ordinary state of claims and debts between the two cities, it is said, must be governed by the ordinary state of their commerce with each other.If the amount imported from city A to city B is not greater than the amount exported from city A to city A, and if the amount imported from city A to city A is not greater than the amount exported from city A to city B, the mutual debts and claims can be offset.However, if the value that Party A inputs from Party B is greater than the value that Party A exports to Party B, the amount that Party A owes to Party B must be greater than the amount that Party B owes to Party A.Creditor's rights and debts cannot offset each other, so if the debt is greater than the creditor's rights, money must be exported.The general situation of remittance not only marks the general state of debts and claims between the two places, but also necessarily marks the general situation of exports and imports between the two places, because the general state of credits and debts between the two places is bound to be affected by the general situation of exports and imports between the two places. dominate.

But even though the general state of exchange may be a sufficient indication of the general state of debts and claims between two places, it does not follow from this that if the general state of debts and claims is in favor of one place, the balance of trade is also in favor of it.The general state of debts and claims between two places does not necessarily depend entirely on the general conditions of commerce between the two places, but is often governed by the general conditions of commerce between the two places with respect to the other places.If, for example, England has purchased goods at Hamburg, Danzig, Riga, etc., and had always paid for them by bills of exchange in Holland, the general state of debts and claims between England and Holland would not be wholly governed by the general state of commerce between these two countries. dominated, but are influenced by the general state of British commerce with those other places.In this case, even if England's annual export to Holland far exceeds the value of England's annual import from Holland, and even if the so-called balance of trade is in England's favor, England will still have to send money to Holland every year.

Nor, moreover, the general state of exchange, according to the usual method of calculating exchange parity, is not sufficient to express, that if the general state of exchange is thought to be in favor of a country, the general state of debts and claims is also in favor of it.In other words, the actual exchange situation may be, and often is, very different from the estimated exchange situation, so that, in many cases, we can never get a definite statement on the general situation of debt claims from the general situation of exchange. in conclusion. Suppose you pay in England a sum of money containing several thousand ounces of silver, according to the British mint, and you get a bill of exchange for payment in France, containing exactly the same amount of pure silver, according to the French mint. , people say that Britain and France exchange at par.If you pay more than you get in exchange, people think you paid in remittance, and say the exchange is bad for England and good for France.If you pay less than what you get in cash, people think you've got a remittance, and say the remittance is bad for France and good for England.

But, first, we cannot always judge the value of the currencies of various countries by the standard of their mints.The degrees of wear and clipping of the currencies of various countries are more or less substandard.The relative value of the common coin of one country to that of another is determined not by the quantity of pure silver that each should contain, but by the quantity of pure silver that each actually contains.Before the introduction of silver coins in the time of King William, the exchange between England and Holland, according to the common calculation method, was based on the standard of the respective mints, and the British discount was 25%.However, the value of the British common coin at that time, according to Landis' research, was 25% lower than its standard value.Therefore, the exchange between the two countries at that time, according to the usual calculation method, although it was so unfavorable to Britain, was actually beneficial to Britain.In fact, a smaller amount of pure silver is paid in England, and the bills of exchange purchased can be exchanged for a larger amount of pure silver in Holland.People who are supposed to pay the water transfer may actually receive the water transfer.Before the reformation of the English gold coinage, the French coinage was much less worn than the English coinage, and the French coinage was perhaps two or three per cent larger than the English coinage, approaching its standard.If the exchange between England and France is not calculated to be unfavorable to England by more than two or three per cent, the real exchange will be in favor of England.And since the reformation of the gold coin, the exchange has always been in favor of England and against France.

Second, the cost of minting money in some countries is paid by the government; in some countries, it is paid by private individuals.In the latter case, the person who brings the bullion to the mint, not only pays the cost of the coinage, but sometimes furnishes some revenue to the government.In England, the cost of coinage is paid by the state. If you bring a pound of standard silver to the mint, you can get back sixty-two shillings, which is a pound of the same standard silver.In France, the coinage is subject to a deduction of eight per cent., which not only pays the cost of coinage, but provides a small revenue to the government.In England, where there is no charge for minting it, the value of the coin can never be much greater than the value of the quantity of silver in it.In France wages increase the value of the coin, just as they increase the value of fine gold and silver plate.A certain amount of French money containing a certain weight of pure silver, therefore, has a greater value than a certain amount of English money containing an equal amount of pure silver, and a greater amount of silver bullion or commodity must be paid for it.Therefore, although the mints of these two countries are similarly close to the standards of their respective mints, a certain amount of British currency containing an equal amount of pure silver may not necessarily be able to purchase a certain amount of French currency containing an equal amount of pure silver, and therefore may not be able to buy it. A bill of exchange for this currency amount.If, in order to purchase a bill of exchange, the excess money paid by England just replaces the cost of coinage in France, the exchange between the two countries is in fact equal.Debts and claims are naturally offset against each other, although the exchange between the two countries is calculated to be very favorable to France.If England paid less currency than said amount for the bill, the exchange between the two countries would actually be in favor of England, though calculatedly in favor of France.

Thirdly, in some places, such as Amsterdam, Hamburg, Venice, etc., foreign bills are paid in what they call bank currency; but in other places, such as London, Lisbon, Antwerp, Leghorn, etc., they are paid in the local common currency.The so-called bank money is always of greater value than the common money of the same nominal amount; for example, a thousand guilders of the Amsterdam bank money are of greater value than a thousand guilders of the local Amsterdam money.The difference between the two, known as the bank's discount, is generally about five per cent in Amsterdam.Assuming that the common currency of the two countries is also close to the standard of their respective mints, but one country pays foreign bills of exchange in common currency, and the other pays foreign bills of exchange in bank currency, the exchange between the two countries, even if it is actually in favor of the common currency. country in which the currency is paid, but may still be calculated in favor of the country in which the currency of the bank is paid.It is like the exchange between two countries, which, though in fact favoring the country which pays foreign bills of exchange in inferior currency, still calculates to the advantage of the country which pays in better currency, for exactly the same reason.Before the recent reformation of the gold coin, the exchange at London was calculated to be unfavorable to London, to Amsterdam, to Hamburg, to Venice, and, I believe, to all other places where payments were made in so-called bank money.But we cannot therefore conclude that this exchange was in fact unfavorable to London.Since the reformation of the gold coin, even correspondence with these places has been in London's favor.To Lisbon, to Antwerp, to Leghorn, and to most places in Europe where bills of exchange are payable in the common currency, except France, London, I believe, the exchange is calculated to be largely in London's favor;

By the way about the bullion banks, especially the one in Amsterdam The currency of such great states as France and England consists almost entirely of their own coin.If the value of this currency falls below the standard value due to wear, shearing, or other reasons, the state can effectively restore the currency to its old appearance by recasting.But the currency of a small country, such as Genoa or Hamburg, seldom consists entirely of its own coin, but must, in a greater part, consist of that of the neighboring countries with which its inhabitants frequently pass.A country like this can only improve its coinage through recasting, but may not be able to improve its currency.Since the nature of this currency is very uncertain, and the value of a certain amount of this currency is also very uncertain, it must be valued lower than its actual value in foreign countries.If, therefore, such a country pays foreign bills of exchange in this currency, the exchange must be very unfavorable to it. This unfavorable exchange rate will inevitably make the merchants suffer.As a relief, such a small country, once aware of the benefits of trade, often stipulates that foreign bills of exchange of a certain value shall not be paid in common currency, but only by bank notes of certain banks or To transfer money on the books of a certain bank.Such a bank, established on the credit and protection of the State, pays bills of exchange in good real money, exactly according to the standards of the State.The banks of Venice, Genoa, Amsterdam, Hamburg, Nuremberg, etc., seem to have been established originally for this purpose, though some of them may have been compelled to change their purpose afterwards.The currency of such a bank being superior to the common currency of these countries, necessarily entails a premium, according to the extent to which the currency is considered to be inferior to the national standard.It is said that the discount of the Bank of Hamburg is generally about 14%. This 14% is considered to be the difference between the national standard good currency and the cheap and cheap currency flowing in from neighboring countries. the difference. Before 1609 the great quantity of clipped and worn foreign coin brought back from all parts of Europe by the great trade of Amsterdam made the value of the currency of Amsterdam about nine per cent.In this case, the newly issued good coins are often dissolved or exported as soon as they are minted.Merchants who possessed large quantities of currency could not always find enough good money to pay their bills of exchange; the value of such bills became largely uncertain, notwithstanding several statutes against this uncertainty. To remedy this disadvantage, Amsterdam established a bank in 1609 under the guarantee of the city.This bank accepts both foreign coinage and the light and worn coin of the country, in addition to deducting the necessary minting and management fees from the value, that is, calculating its intrinsic value according to the standard good currency of the country.After deduction of this small charge, the remaining value, i.e. on the books of the bank, is entered as a credit.This credit is called bank money, and since the money it represents is exactly according to the mint standard, it always has the same real value, and its intrinsic value is greater than that of common money.At the same time, it is also stipulated that all bills of exchange over 600 guilders paid or sold in Amsterdam can be paid in bank currency.This regulation immediately eliminates all uncertainty about the value of bills of exchange.As a result of this regulation, every merchant, in order to pay their foreign bills of exchange, is obliged to deal with that bank.This necessarily creates a need for bank money. Bank money, besides its inherent superiority over common money, and the added value which necessarily arises from the foregoing needs, has several other advantages.It is free from fire, looting, and other accidents; the city of Amsterdam, which is fully responsible for it, pays for it only by simple transfer, without calculation or risk of transport from one place to another place.Because of its various advantages, it seems that there has been a kind of discount from the beginning; everyone believes that all the money originally stored in the bank is allowed to stay there, and no one wants to ask the bank to return it. A discount is available for sale on the market.The owner of the bank credit loses this premium if the bank is required to reimburse it.New shillings minted from the mint can neither buy any more goods in the market than common worn shillings, so good real money taken out of bank coffers and put in private coffers, If it is mixed with common currency, it will be difficult to identify, and its value will not be higher than that of common currency.When it is kept in a bank vault, its superiority is known and confirmed.When it flowed into private coffers, it cost more to confirm its superiority than the difference between the two currencies.Besides, every other advantage of bank money must be lost as soon as it is withdrawn from the bank coffer.Security is lost, convenience and security of transferability are lost, and usefulness for payment of foreign bills of exchange is lost.Nay, it is impossible to withdraw money from the bank coffers without paying a deposit fee in advance. This coin deposit, or the deposit which the bank has to pay in coin, is the original capital of the bank, or the whole value of that which is represented by the so-called bank money.Now, it is generally believed that that is only a very small part of the bank's capital.In order to facilitate the trade in bullion, it has been the practice of banks for many years, to pay credit to those who store up bullion.This credit is generally about five per cent. below the mint price of bullion.At the same time, the bank draws upon a certificate or receipt of receipt enabling the depositor or bearer of the bullion to withdraw the deposit at any time within six months, on condition that the bank currency equal to that credit is surrendered to the bank, And pay twenty-five thousandths (if the deposit is silver) or fifty thousandths (if the deposit is gold) custody fee.At the same time, however, it was stipulated that if such payment could not be made at maturity, the gold and silver bullion in deposit would belong to the bank at the price at the time of receipt, or at the time at which credit was paid for it.The deposit fee thus paid may be regarded as a kind of warehouse rent.There are also several different reasons for why the rent for warehouses of gold is so much higher than that of silver.It is said that the purity of gold is more difficult to determine than the purity of silver.The more precious metals are easier to counterfeit, and the losses caused by counterfeiting are also greater.Moreover, silver is the standard metal, and it is said that the intention of the state is to encourage the stockpiling of silver rather than of gold. Gold and silver bullion is most commonly stocked when the price of bullion is a little lower than usual, and is often offered when it is dear.In Holland the market price of bullion is generally higher than its mint price, as was the case in England, before the recent reformation of the gold coin, and for the same reason.The difference, it is said, is generally from six to sixteen steves per mark, that is, eight ounces of silver, of which there is eleven cents of pure silver and one cent in alloy.The price given by the banks, that is, the credit given by the banks, for the deposit of such silver, whose fineness is generally known and confirmed when it is minted in foreign coinage, is twenty marks per cent. Two guilders; the mint price is about twenty-three guilders, and the market price is twenty-three and six guilders, or even twenty-three and sixteen guilders, an excess of two or three per cent. .The bank price, mint price, and market price of bullion remain in almost the same proportion.A person may generally sell his receipt for the difference between the mint price and the market price of a bullion bar.Certificates of receipt for bullion are almost always of a certain price.So, sit around waiting for the six months to expire without withdrawing the deposit, or forget to pay the custodial fee of 25 thousandths or 50 thousandths, and get a new certificate of acceptance for another six months, so that the bank can press It is very rare that the price at the time of receipt takes the reserve gold as own.However, though this phenomenon does not happen often, it does happen from time to time, and it happens more often in the case of gold than in the case of silver, because silver is less expensive to keep, while gold, being a more precious metal, requires more storage. Pay higher warehouse rents. A person who receives bank credits and certificates of receipt by depositing gold and silver bullion, pays his bills on bank credits when due.As for whether to sell or keep the acceptance certificate, it depends on his judgment on the rise and fall of the price of gold and silver bars.However, most of these bank credit and acceptance certificates will not be kept for a long time and there is no need to keep them for a long time.He who has a certificate of receipt and wants to draw bullion always finds a great deal of bank credit or bank money to buy at ordinary prices; Accept the certificate and let him buy it. The owner of the bank credit and the holder of the acceptance certificate are two different creditors of the bank.The holder of the receipt certificate cannot withdraw the gold and silver bars stated on the receipt certificate unless he gives the bank a certain amount of bank currency equal to the price of the received gold and silver bars.If he has no bank money himself, he has to buy bank money from someone who has bank money.But a person who has bank money cannot withdraw gold and silver bullion unless he presents a certificate of receipt to the bank indicating the amount he needs.If he does not have a certificate of acceptance himself, he may also purchase a certificate of acceptance from someone who has a certificate of acceptance.The purchase of bank money by a person who has received a certificate is really the right to withdraw a certain quantity of gold and silver bullion, the mint price of which is five per cent higher than its bank price.The five per cent premium which he usually pays for bank money, therefore, is not paid for an imaginary value, but for a real value.A person who has bank money buys a certificate of receipt, in fact, buys the right to withdraw a certain amount of gold and silver bullion, the market price of which is generally two or three per cent higher than its mint price.Therefore, the price he paid for the certificate of acceptance was likewise paid for a real value.The price of the certificate of receipt and the price of the bank's money together constitute the full value or price of the bullion. Deposit the domestically circulated coins into the bank, and the bank will not only give the bank credit, but also issue a certificate of acceptance, but such a certificate of acceptance is usually worthless and cannot be sold at any price in the market.For example, if a Dacton worth three guilders and three steves is deposited in a bank, the credit obtained in exchange is only worth three guilders, or five percent less than the circulating value.Although the bank also issues a certificate of acceptance, so that the bearer can pay a 25/1000 custody fee at any time within six months, and put forward the Daktong deposited in the bank, but this kind of certificate of acceptance is often not available in the bank. What is the price in the market.Although most of the banknotes of the three shields can be sold in the market for three shields and three steves, that is, after they are raised, they can get the full value of the dakoto, but before they are raised, they have to pay 25 per thousand for safekeeping. Fees, so the gains and losses are balanced, and they just cancel each other out.However, if the bank discount is reduced to 3%, this kind of acceptance certificate can be sold in the market for a certain price, which can be sold for 1.75%.But at present, the bank discount is mostly around 5%, so this kind of acceptance certificate is often allowed to expire, or as people say, it is allowed to belong to the bank.As for the acceptance certificate obtained by storing Jindak, it is more often allowed to expire, because the rent of its warehouse is 50 per thousand, which is particularly expensive.When the stock of this coin or bar is left to the bank, the bank often receives a profit of five per cent, which may be regarded as the rent of warehouses for the permanent custody of the stock. The amount of bank currency for which the certificate of acceptance has expired is necessarily large.The amount of bank money for which the certificate of receipt has expired must include the entire original capital of the bank.It is generally assumed that since the first deposit of all the original capital of the bank, no one has thought of exchanging new certificates of change, or withdrawing the deposit, because for all the reasons we have given above, no matter what is used Either of those two methods is bound to be a loss.But however large this amount may be, it is supposed to form a small part of the total amount of bank money.The Bank of Amsterdam, for many years past, was the largest storehouse of gold and silver bullion in Europe, yet its certificates of receipt were seldom expired, or seldom owned by the bank as a share.A much greater portion of bank money, or credit on the books of banks, has been created by bullion dealers in the accumulation and withdrawal of money over the past few years. Without a certificate of acceptance, no claim can be made to the bank.The relatively small amount of bank currency whose certificates have expired is mixed with the relatively large amount of bank currency whose certificates are still valid, so that although the amount of bank currency without certificates is considerable, there is never a particular part of bank currency that will never be claimed by anyone. .A bank cannot be obligated to two persons for the same thing; and the owner of bank money without a certificate of acceptance can never demand payment from the bank until he has purchased a certificate of acceptance.When he is calm, he has no difficulty in purchasing a certificate of acceptance at the market price.This price generally corresponds to the price at which coin or bullion can be sold in the market under the right to withdraw from a bank by a certificate of acceptance. But in times of national calamity, the situation is different. For example, when the French invaded in 1672, bank currency owners wanted to withdraw their deposits from the bank and keep them for themselves. Everyone needed to receive a certificate.This need may significantly increase the price of receiving a certificate.Those who have certificates of acceptance may have an unreasonable idea, not asking for 2% or 3% of the bank currency stated in each certificate of acceptance, but asking for 50%.Knowing the enemies of the banking organization, they will even buy in all acceptance certificates to prevent the treasure from being moved out.It is generally believed that during this extraordinary period, banks will break the routine of paying only to holders of accepted certificates.A person who has no bank money but has a certificate of receipt must always have received only two or three per cent. of the value of the deposit stated on the certificate of receipt.It is said, therefore, that on this occasion the Bank will not hesitate to pay the full value in money or bullion to those who have the Bank's money in their books, but who have no certificate of receipt to withdraw their deposits from the Bank; , to pay two or three per cent for those who have certificates of acceptance but no bank money, for this amount, at this time, is the full value they are due. That is, in normal and peaceful times, the interest of the holder of the acceptance certificate is to reduce the discount, so as to buy bank currency at a lower price (thus purchasing the gold and silver bars that can be withdrawn as stated on the acceptance certificate at a lower price), or Sell ​​the acceptance certificate at a higher price to someone who has bank money and wants to withdraw gold and silver bars; the price of the acceptance certificate is generally equal to the difference between the market price of the bank currency and the market price of the coins or gold and silver bars stated in the acceptance certificate .On the contrary, the interest of the owner of the bank currency is to increase the discount, so as to sell his bank currency at a high price, or to buy a certificate of acceptance at a low price.Such opposing interests often lead to fraudulent speculation.In order to prevent this kind of fraud, the bank has decided in recent years that whenever it sells bank currency for currency, it will pay a 5% discount, and when it buys bank currency again, it will pay a discount of 4%.As a result of this determination, the agio cannot rise above five per cent, nor can it fall below four per cent; ratio between.But before such a decision is made, the market price of bank currency varies. According to the influence of these two opposite interests on the market, sometimes the discount rises to 9%, and sometimes it falls to the same level as the common currency. parity. The Bank of Amsterdam proclaims that it does not lend out any part of the gold deposit; and that for every guilder entered in the books of the gold deposit, a coin or bullion equal to the value of a guilder is deposited in the treasury.The acceptance certificate has not yet expired and can be withdrawn at any time. In fact, the part of the currency and gold and silver bars that are constantly flowing out and inflowing are all kept in the treasury and cannot be questioned. It seems doubtful whether the same is true of that part of the capital which is required to be withdrawn, and which actually remains in the bank forever, probably during the existence of the federal state.In Amsterdam, however, the tenet that for every guilder of bank money there is a guilder of gold and silver kept in the bank's vaults is at last the strongest of all creeds.The city of Amsterdam is a guarantor of this creed.The bank is under the supervision of the four current mayors, who are re-elected once a year. The four new mayors will compare the account books, investigate the bank vault, and take an oath to take over.In this sincerely religious country, the system of oaths has not been abolished.With this alternation, there seems to be sufficient security against all impropriety.In all the revolutions which faction gave rise to in Amsterdam politics, the dominant parties did not attack their predecessors' disloyalty on the point of bank management.Nothing could have had a more profound effect on the honor and credit of a party in decline than such an attack; and if it had been justified, we may affirm it, it would have been made.In 1672, when the King of France was at Utrecht, the Bank of Amsterdam paid so quickly that no one doubted its fidelity to the contract.At the time, some of the currency withdrawn from the bank's vaults had been charred by the town hall fire that had followed the bank's establishment.These coins must have been kept in bank vaults from then on. The total amount of gold and silver in this bank has long been a matter of conjecture.But the total amount of Guangan can only be speculated.It is generally supposed that there were about two thousand persons who had accounts with this bank; and assuming that each of them deposited an average value of fifteen hundred pounds (which was the greatest supposition), the total amount of money in the bank, and consequently the total amount of gold and silver in the bank, It is approximately equal to three million pounds, and calculated at eleven guilders per pound, it is approximately equal to thirty-three million guilders.Such a large sum, which would suffice for a very wide circulation, is much smaller than some have supposed that the sum was exaggerated. The city of Amsterdam receives a large income from this bank.In addition to the so-called warehouse rent, anyone who opens a current account with a bank for the first time has to pay a fee of ten guilders; If the amount transferred is less than three hundred guilders, six stevies are required to prevent small transfers.A fine of twenty-five guilders shall be imposed on failure to settle accounts twice a year.If the amount transferred exceeds the stored amount, a fee equal to 3% of the excess will be charged and the request will be put on hold.According to common people's imagination, the bank returns foreign coins and gold and silver bullion to its own after the expiration of the acceptance certificate, and sells them when it is favorable, and also makes a lot of profits.In addition, bank currency is sold at a 5 percent discount and bought at a 4 percent discount, also providing a profit to the bank.These differential gains greatly outweigh the costs of paying staff salaries and overhead management.The storage fee alone is said to be equal to the annual net income of 150,000 to 200,000 dong.However, the goal of this organization was not income, but public welfare.Its purpose is to prevent merchants from suffering losses due to unfavorable exchange rates.The resulting income was unexpected, almost an accident.In order to show why, the exchange between countries that pay in bank money and those that pay in common money seems mostly to be in favor of the former, and against the latter.Unknowingly said a long digression, now, I should return to this topic.The currency in which the bills of exchange are paid in the former country is always constant in value, just in accordance with the standard of its mint; the currency in which the bill of exchange is paid in the latter country is constantly changing, and almost always more or less below the standard of its mint. standard. Section 2. The restriction of this exception is also unreasonable according to other principles 在本章的前節，我竭力說明，即根據重商主義的原理，對於貿易差額被認為不利於我國的那些國家的貨物的輸入，也不必加以異常的限制。 然而，此種限制以及許多其他商業條例所根據的整個貿易差額學說，是再不合理不過的。當兩地通商時，這種學說認為，如果貿易額平衡，則兩地各無得失；如果貿易額略有偏倚，就必一方損失、另一方得利，得失程度和偏倚程度相稱。但這兩種設想都是錯誤的。像我後面所要說明的那樣，獎勵金與獨佔權，雖為本國利益而設立，但由獎勵金及獨佔權所促成的貿易，卻可能對本國不利，而且事實上常是這樣。反之，不受限制而自然地、正常地進行的兩地間的貿易，雖未必對兩地同樣有利，但必對兩地有利。 所謂利益或利得，我的解釋，不是金銀量的增加，而是一國土地和勞動年產物交換價值的增加，或是一國居民年收入的增加。 如果兩地貿易額平衡，而兩地間的貿易，全由兩國國產商品的交換構成，那末在大多數場合，它們不僅都會得利，所得利益而且必相等或幾乎相等。這樣，各為對方剩餘生產物的一部分提供了一個市場。甲方為生產及製造這一部分剩餘生產物而投下的資本，即在一定數目居民間分配並給他們提供收入或生計的資本，將由乙方補還；乙方投下的這種資本，將由甲方補還。所以，兩國的居民，都有一部分，將間接從另一國取得他們的收入與生計。兩國間所交換的商品，其價值又被假設相等，則在大多數場合，兩國投在這種貿易上的資本，亦必相等或幾乎相等；而且，因為都是用來生產兩國的國產商品，所以，兩國居民由此種分配而得的收入與生計，亦必相等或幾乎相等。彼此互相提供的這種收入與生計，按照商務來往大小的比例，有多有少。若彼此每年都等於十萬鎊，則彼此給對方居民所提供的，亦為十萬鎊的年收入；若等於一百萬鎊，則彼此給對方居民提供的，亦為一百萬鎊的年收入。 設甲乙兩國間的貿易，是屬於這樣的性質，即甲國貨物輸至乙國的純為國產商品，乙國輸至甲國的回程貨則純為外國商品，那末，在這假設下，兩國的貿易額，仍被認為是平衡的，彼此都以商品償付。在這場合，兩國仍然享有利得，但利得的程度不同；從這種貿易取得最大收入的，是只輸出國產商品的那一國居民。比方說，英國從法國輸入的，純為法國所生產的國產商品，但英國卻沒有法國所需要的商品，每年不得不以大量的外國貨物如煙草與東印度貨物來償付。這種貿易雖可給兩國居民提供若干收入，但給法國居民所提供的收入，必多於給英國居民所提供的。法國每年投在這種貿易上的全部資本，是在法國人民間分配的。但英國資本，只有一部分，即用來生產英國貨物備與外國貨物交換的那一部分資本，是每年在英國人民間分配的。其資本，有較大部分是用來補還弗吉尼亞、印度和中國的資本，並對這些遙遠國家居民提供一種收入與生計。即使兩國所投資本相等或幾乎相等，但法國資本的使用，給法國人民所增加的收入，要比英國資本的使用，所增於英國人民收入的大得多。因為，在這場合，法國所經營的，是對英國的直接的消費品國外貿易；英國所經營的，是對法國的迂迴的消費品國外貿易。這兩種國外貿易所生的不同結果，已經在前面充分說明過了。 不過，兩國間的貿易，也許既不能雙方全為國產商品的交換，也不能一方全為國產商品，一方全為外國貨物。幾乎一切國家，彼此間所交換的，都一部分是國產商品，一部分是外國貨物。但是，國產商品占交換品最大部分而外國貨物占交換品最小部分的國家，總是主要的利得者。 假若英國用以償還法國每年輸入品的，不是煙草與東印度貨物，而是金銀，那貿易額便被認為是不平衡的，因為不是以商品而是以金銀償付商品。其實，在這場合，也像在前一場合一樣，能給兩國人民提供若干收入，不過給法國人民提供的，比給英國人民提供的多。英國人民，必從此取得收入。為生產英國商品以購買金銀而投下的資本，即在英國一定人民間分配，並給他們提供收入的資本，必可因此而補還，使其用途得以繼續。輸出一定價值的金銀，不減少英國資本總量，正如輸出等價值任何其他貨物，不減少英國資本總量一樣。反之，在大多數場合，都會增加英國資本總量。只有其國外需求被認為大於其國內需求，而其回程貨在國內的價值大於輸出品在國內的價值的那些貨物才輸到國外去。如果煙草在英國僅值十萬鎊，但輸往法國而購回的葡萄酒，在英國卻可值十一萬鎊，那末這種交渙，就可使英國資本增加一萬鎊。如果英國以金十萬鎊所購得的法國葡萄酒，在英國亦可值十一萬鎊，則這種交換也就同樣可使英國資本增加一萬鎊。在酒庫中有值十一萬鎊葡萄酒的商人，比在堆找中有值十萬鎊煙草的商人更富裕，同樣也比在金櫃中有值十萬鎊的商人更富裕。他和其他二人比較，可推動更大的勞動量，並繪更多人民提供收入、生計與職業。但國家的資本與其全體人民的資本相等，而一國每年所能維持的勞動量，又等於這一切資本所能維待的勞動量。所以，一國資本及其每年所能維持的勞動量，就大都會因此種交換而增加。為英國的利益計，與其用弗吉尼亞煙草或用巴西、秘魯金銀，當然無寧用它自己的鐵器及寬幅厚呢來購買法國葡萄酒。直接的消費品國外貿易，總比迂迴的消費品國外貿易更有利。但以金銀進行的迂迴的消費品國外貿易，並不比以其他貨物進行的迂迴的消費品國外貿易更不利。無礦產國每年輸出金銀，不會使金銀更容易干竭．正如無煙草國每年輸出煙草，不會使煙草更容易干竭。有資力購買煙草的國家，決不會長久缺乏煙草；同樣，有資力購買金銀的國家，也決不會良久缺乏金銀。 有人說，工人和麥酒店的交易，是一種虧本的交易，而製造業國和葡萄酒產國間自然會有的貿易，也可以說有同樣的性質。我卻以為，工人和麥酒店的交易，並不一定是虧本的交易。就此種貿易本身的性質說，其利益和任何其他貿易相同，不過，也許比較容易被濫用。釀酒家的職業，甚至小酒販的職業，與其他職業同是必要的分工部門。工人所需的麥酒量，一般是與其親自釀造，無寧向釀酒家購買；而且，他若是一個貧窮工人，那末他購買麥酒，一般是與其向釀酒家作大量的購買，無寧向小酒販作小量的購買。倘若他是個貪食者，他可能購買過多的麥酒，正如他可能購買過多的家畜肉；要是他想扮作一個翩翩公子，他可能購買過多呢絨布匹。貿易自由，雖然可能被濫用，而且，有幾種貿易自由，特別容易發生這種結果，但無論如何，對幹工人大眾，這一切貿易自由，總是有利的。此外，有時有了由嗜酒過度而蕩產的個人，但似乎用不著擔心會有這樣的國家。雖然在每個國家，都有許多人，在酒這方面所花費的超過他們資力所允許的程度，但有更多人，所花費的小於他們資力所允許的程度。應該指出，根據經驗，葡萄酒的低廉，似乎不是泥醉的原因，而是節酒的原因。葡萄酒產國的人民，一般是歐洲最節酒的人民，例如西班牙人、葡萄牙人、法國南部各省人民。對於普通日常飲食，人民很少過度使用。像溫和啤酒那樣廉價的飲料，就是大花大用，也不能表現一個人的寬宏和好客。反之，只在過熱或過寒不能栽種葡萄樹，因而葡萄酒異常稀少昂貴的國家，如北方民族、熱帶民族（如幾內亞海岸的黑人），泥醉才成為普遍的惡習。當法國軍隊，從法國北部各省開拔至南部各省，即從葡萄酒昂貴區域開拔至葡萄酒低廉區域時，據說，起初往往因見良好葡萄酒如此價廉新鮮而耽溺其中，但駐留數月之後。其中大部分，便像當地居民一樣節酒了。同樣，如果把外國葡萄酒稅、麥芽稅、麥酒稅、啤酒稅一律取消，或可使英國中下等階級人民間暫時盛行泥醉風氣，但不久也許就會養成一個恆久的普遍的節酒習俗。現今，在上流社會即有資力消費最貴飲料的人中，泥醉已經不是他們的惡習了。吃麥酒而泥醉的縉紳先生，極不常見。此外，葡萄酒貿易在英國的限制，與其說為了要防止人民走入（如果可以這樣說）酒店，無寧說為了要防止人民，使其不能購買價最廉物最美的飲料。那種限制，有利於葡萄牙的葡萄酒貿易，不利於法國的葡萄酒貿易。據說，對於我國製造品，葡萄牙人是比較好的顧客，法國人是比較不好的顧客，所以，我們應當優待葡萄牙人，加以獎勵。據說，他們照顧了我們，我們也應當照顧他們。小商人的卑鄙策略，居然成為一個大帝國政治設施的原則。其實，只有小商人，才會把這種策略看作是對待顧客的規則。至於大商人，不問這些小節，總是在價最廉物最美的地方購買他的貨物。 依據這樣的原則，各國都認為他們的利益在於使一切鄰國變得窮困。各國都嫉妒與他們通商的國家的繁榮，並把這些國家的利得，看作是他們的損失。國際通商，家個人通商一樣，原來應該是團結與友誼的保證，現在，卻成為不和與仇恨的最大源泉。王公大臣們反覆無常的野心，在這世紀及前世紀，對歐洲和平所造成的危害，並不大於商人和製造業者們狂妄的嫉妒心所造成的危害。人間支配者的暴力與不正，自古以來即是一種禍害。我認為，按照人事的性質，這種禍害是無法除去的。至於不是亦不應該是人間支配者的商人和製造業者們，其卑鄙的貪慾，其獨佔的精神，雖也許不能改正，但要不讓他們擾亂別人的安寧，卻是極其容易的。 最初發明這種原則傳佈這種原則的，無疑是獨佔的精神；最先倡導這種原則的人並不像後來信奉這種原則的人那麼傻。在任何國家，人民大眾的利益總在於而且必然在於，向售價最廉的人購買他們所需要的各種物品。這個命題是非常明白的；費心思去證明它，倒是一種滑稽的事情。如果沒有這班商人和製造業者自私自利的詭辯混淆了人們的常識，這亦不會成為什麼問題。在這一點上，這班商人和製造業者的利益與人民大眾的利益正相反。像同業組合內自由人的利益在於阻止國內居民僱用其他人而只僱用他們自己一樣，這班商人和製造業者的利益，在於自己保有國內市場的獨佔權。因此，在英國，在歐洲大多數其他國家，對干幾乎一切由外國商人輸入的商品，都課以異常重稅。因此，凡能輸入本國，與本國製造品競爭的一切外國製造品，都課以高的關稅，或禁止輸入。因此，對於貿易差額被認為不利於我國的那些國家，換言之，對民族仇恨異常激烈的國家幾乎一切貨物的輸入加以異常的限制。 在戰爭或政治上，鄰國的財富，雖對我國有危險，但在貿易上，則確對我國有利益。在戰時，敵國的財富，或可使敵國能夠維持比我國強大的海陸軍。但在和平的通商狀態下，鄰國的財富，必使他們能夠和我們交換更大的價值，必對我國產業的直接生產物或用這種生產物購進來的物品，提供更好的市場。勤勞的鄰近的富人，和窮人比較，是更好的顧客；鄰近的富國，也是這樣。經營同種製造業的富人，固然是鄰近各同業者的危險鄰人，但他的花費，可給鄰近的其餘一切人提供好的市場，所以，對絕大多數鄰人是有利的。不僅如此，較貧的經營同業的工人，又將因此而減低其售價，因而，對其餘一切人有利。同樣，富國的製造業者，無疑會成為鄰國同種製造業者極危險的競爭者，但這種競爭，卻有利於人民大眾。此外，這樣富國的大花費，必能在其他方面，給人民大眾提供良好的市場，使他們得利。想發財的私人，決不會退居窮鄉僻壤，一定會住在首都或大商業都市。他們知道，財富流通極少的地方，所可取得的財富極少；財富流通極多的地方，可有些財富歸到他們手裡。指導著一個人、十個人、二十個人的常識的原則，應該支配一百萬人、一千萬人、二千萬人的判斷，應該使全國國民都認為，鄰國的富乃是本國可能獲得財富的原因和機會。想由國外貿易致富的國家，在其鄰國都是富裕勤勉的商業國時，最易達到目的。一國四周，如果都是遊牧的未開化人和貧窮的野蠻人，那末，耕作本國土地，經營國內商業，無疑可使國家致富，但要由國外貿易致富，就絕不可能了。古代的埃及人和近代的中國人似乎就是靠耕作本國土地、經營國內商業而致富的。據說，古代埃及人，極不注意國外貿易；大家知道，近代中國人極輕視國外貿易，不給與國外貿易以法律的正當保護。以一切鄰國陷於貧困境況為目標的近代外國通商原則，如果能夠產出它所企望的結果，那就一定會陷國外貿易於不被人注意、不被人重視的地位。 法國和英國間的貿易，所以會在兩國都受到那麼多的阻礙與限制，就是此等原則的結果。如果這兩國能拋棄商業的嫉妒和國民的仇恨，來考察其真實利害關係，那末對英國來說，法國的貿易，將比歐洲任何其他國家的貿易更有利；由於同一理由，對法國來說，英國的貿易，亦將比歐洲任何其他國家的貿易更有利。法國為英國最近的鄰國。英國南部沿海各地與法國北部及西北部沿海各地間的貿易，好像國內貿易一樣，可以每年往返四次、五次乃至六次。這兩國投在這種貿易上的資本，比較投在國外貿易大多數其他部門上的等量資本，能夠推動四倍、五倍乃至六倍的勞動量，能夠僱用和養活四倍、五倍乃至六倍的人數。這兩國彼此相隔最遠的各地間的貿易，也至少可望每年往返一次。所以，就連這種貿易，也比我國對歐洲其他大部分地方的國外貿易同樣有利。若與誇大的我國對北美殖民地的貿易（那一般要三年，乃至四年五年以上，才能往返一次）比較，那至少也有利三倍。此外，法國據說有居民二千三百萬，我國北美殖民地居民卻據說不過三百萬。法國又比北美洲富饒得多，雖然由於法國財富分配不平均，法國的貧民乞丐，比北美多得多。所以，與我國北美殖民地比較，法國所能提供的市場，至少大八倍；加以往返更為頻繁，利益要大二十四倍。英國的貿易，亦同樣有利於法國。英國貿易對於法國的利益，要按照兩國財富、人口與鄰近的程度，大干法國殖民地貿易對於法國的利益。這就是兩國智者所認為宜加以阻止的貿易和最受其偏愛獎勵的貿易這二者間很大的差別。 然而，使兩國間開放的自由的貿易對兩國那麼有利的環境，卻成為產生這種貿易的主要障礙的原因。因為是鄰國，它們必然是故國；於是，一方的富強，增加另一方的恐懼，而本來可增進國民友誼的有利因素，卻成為助長激烈的民族仇恨的原因，它們同是富裕勤勉的國家。每一國商人和製造者，都擔心會在技術與活動上遇到另一國商人和製造業者的競爭。商業上的嫉妒，由激烈的民族仇恨所激起，而激烈的民族仇恨也助長了商業上的嫉妒，兩者相互助長。兩國的貿易者，都熱烈地確信他們自私自利的謬說，宣稱不受限制的國外貿易，必然會生出不利的貿易差額，而不利的貿易差額，又一定會導致國家的滅亡。 在歐洲各商業國內，自命的這種學說的學者常常預告；不利的貿易差額，將使國家頻於滅亡。這激起了各商業國不少的憂慮，幾乎各商業國都試圖改變貿易差額，使對本國有利而對鄰國不利。但在這一切憂慮以後，在這一切無效的嘗試以後，似乎沒有一個歐洲國家，曾因上述原因而變得貧困。和重商主義者的預料相反，實行開放門戶並允許自由貿易的都市與國家，不但不曾因此種自由貿易而滅亡，而且因此致富。歐洲今日，從某幾點說，配稱為自由港的都市雖有幾個，但配稱為自由港的國家卻還沒有。最接近於此的國家，也許要算荷蘭了，雖然仍離此很遠。大家承認，不僅荷蘭國民財富全部得自對外貿易，而且大部分必要生活資料也得自對外貿易。 我在前面已經說明，有另一種差額，和貿易差額極不相同。一國的盛衰，要看這差額是有利或是不刮。這就是年生產與年消費的差額。前面說過，年生產的交換價值如果超過了年消費的交換價值，社會的資本每年就必然會按照這超過額的比例而增加起來。在這場合，社會在其收入內維持其生存，每年從其收入中節省下來的部分，自然會加到社會資本上去，並用以進一步增加年生產物。反之，如果年生產的交換價值，小於年消費的交換價值，社會的資本每年就必然會按照短少的比例而減少下去。在這場合，社會的支出超過了社會的收入，那必然會侵蝕社會的資本。資本必然會減退，隨著資本的減退，其產業年產物的交換價值亦減退。 生產與消費的差額，和所謂貿易差額全不相同。在沒有對外貿易、不與世界往來的國家內，可以發生這種差額。在財富、人口與改良都在逐漸增進或在逐漸減退的全地球上，也可以發生這種差額。 即使在所謂的貿易差額一般不利於一個國家時，生產與消費的差額仍可不斷地有利於這個國家。即使半世紀來，這個國家輸入的價值都大於輸出的價值；在這全期間內，流入的金銀，全部立即輸出；流通鑄幣逐漸減少而以各種紙幣替代鑄幣；甚至它對各主要通商國家所負的債務，亦在逐漸增加；但它的真實財富，它的土地勞動年產物的交換價值，仍可在這期間，按照比以前大得多的比例增加起來。我國北美殖民地的狀態，以及它們在現今的擾亂事件發生以前對不列顛的貿易狀態，都可證明這並不是一個不接近於事實的假設。第四章論退稅