Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:28:00.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Montesquieu and the Wealth of Nations*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2014

Nicos E. Devletoglou
Nicos E. Devletoglou*
Affiliation:
London School of Economicsand Political Science
Get access

Extract

In the recently recovered Preface to the French edition of The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money Keynes refers to Montesquieu (1689–1755) as the greatest French economist. Addressing the French public Keynes writes that “Montesquieu was the real French equivalent of Adam Smith. The greatest of your economists, head and shoulders above the physiocrats in penetration, clear-headedness and good sense (which are the qualities an economist should have).” The admiration that Keynes expressed for Montesquieu in that document led me to undertake an investigation of Montesquieu's works. This research has made it possible to show that Montesquieu, though never fancying himself as an economist, had been creatively concerned with a crucial economic problem: the comparative statics of economic welfare.

Keynes was conscious mainly of Montesquieu's interest theory. He admired this theory in passing in the French Preface, but mentioned in no other of his works the influence that Montesquieu had on him. Nowhere did Keynes undertake to elaborate on or indeed justify any of his extraordinary remarks about Montesquieu. There is no reference to Montesquieu in the text proper of either the English or the French edition of the General Theory, or in any other of Keynes's works. As it stands, Keynes's sudden conviction that Montesquieu was the greatest French economist is hardly convincing. In this essay on attempt has been made to collect some of the evidence necessary for us to appraise the economic work of Montesquieu. I hope to vindicate the introduction of Montesquieu as an economist to the Anglo-Saxon world and to put Keynes's extraordinary contentions into proper perspective.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science/Revue canadienne de economiques et science politique , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , February 1963 , pp. 1 - 25
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Warm gratitude goes to Professor Lord Robbins, upon whose time I drew heavily while preparing this study, as it was always a pleasant occasion to hear and absorb his criticisms. I am also indebted to Professor Letiche of the University of California in Berkeley to whom I can trace my interest in Montesquieu.

References

1 Preface to the French Edition of The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. Professor R. F. Kahn has kindly made available to me a photograph of the recovered original manuscript with permission to quote certain passages. He has suggested that the Preface would be published in its entirety in a few years' time along with other papers of Keynes's. Until very recently the English manuscript of the Preface could not be traced after it was translated into French by de Largentaye, M. Jean in Théorie Générale de l'Emploi, de l'Intérêt et de la Monnaie (Paris, 1943), 9–13 Google Scholar; but an English translation from the French version prepared by Professor Peacock is available in International Economic Papers, no. 4, 1954, 66–9.Google Scholar Professor Peacock's translation should serve as an excellent substitute until the original is published. The French Preface is an invaluable document and it would be unwise if the economic historians continued to neglect it. In addition to the remarks Keynes made there about Montesquieu, he took the opportunity to defend, clarify and, to a certain extent, restate briefly his position in the light of the criticism and discussion that followed the publication of the English edition of the General Theory in 1936.

2 See below section on Money, Inflation, and Interest.

3 The following six French works, listed in chronological order, are the only studies that we have of Montesquieu's significance as an economist: Duprat, Pascal, “Les Idées Economiques de Montesquieu,” Journal des économistes, 1870;Google Scholar Oczapowski, Joseph, “Montesquieu économiste,” Revue d'économie politique, 1891, p. 1039 Google Scholar; Jaubert, Charles, Montesquieu économiste (Paris, 1901)Google Scholar; du Clos, Tournyol, “Les Idées Financières de Montesquieu,” Revue de science et de la législation financière, 1912;Google Scholar de la Taille-Lolainville, C., Les Idées économiques et financières de Montesquieu (Paris, 1940)Google Scholar; and Cotta, Alain, “Le Développement Economique dans la Pensée de Montesquieu,” Revue d'histoire économique et sociale, numéro 4, 1957.Google Scholar Fletcher's, F. T. H. Montesquieu and English Politics, 1750–1800 (London, 1939)Google Scholar includes a passing glance at Montesquieu's economic thought, but generally it misses the essential parts of our author's system. I have found the above works very useful, although the present study explores a new aspect of Montesquieu's contribution to economics.

4 De l'Esprit des lois, Preface, p. 229. All quotations from Montesquieu are taken from Montesquieu: Oeuvres complètes (Paris: Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, NRF, 1949–1951, 2 vols.).Google Scholar Abbreviations are used throughout the paper as follows: LP for Lettres persanes; EL for De l'Esprit des lois; DDEL for Dossier l'esprit des lois; CGR for Considérations sur les causes de la grandeur des Romains et de lew decadence; DCGR for Dossier des considérations sur la grandeur des Romains; MDE for Mémoire sur les dettes de l'Etat; Voyages for Mes Voyages; and Pensées for Mes Pensées. Numbers accompanying the latter are not page numbers but Montesquieu's own numbering of Pensées. The titles of Montesquieu's odier works are not abbreviated.

5 EL, XIV, chap. 6. It should be of some interest to the student of doctrine to note that, whilst the Economistes or Physiocrats hardly caught the spirit of Montesquieu's message, Dupont de Nemours, prominent among them, was writing: “L'époque de l'ébranlement général qui a déterminé les esprits à s'appliquer à l'étude de l'économie politique remonte jusqu'à M. de Montesquieu. Ce furent les éclairs de son génie qui montrèrent à notre nation, encore si frivole, que l'étude de l'intérêt des hommes en société pouvait être préférable aux recherches d'une metaphysique abstraite, et même plus constamment agréable que la lecture des petits romans.” Notice abrégée, Préambule, , Oeuvres de Quesnay, edited by Oncken, Auguste (Frankfurt, 1888), 145–6.Google Scholar

6 Pensées: 1976.

7 EL, VII, chaps. 2, 4, 6; VIII, chaps. 16, 17, 21; LP, 288–90.

8 Pensées: 311, 366, 367, 1883, 1973, 1976, 1977.

9 Pensées: 1973; EL, 496–7; Encouragement aux sciences, 53-7.

10 EL, XXI, chap. 14; Pensées: 1883, 1976.

11 Pensées: 1995.

12 LP, 287–90; Pensées: 366.

13 EL, XXIII, chap. 15; Pensées: 366, 1973.

14 EL, VII, chap. 6; Pensées: 311, 670; EL, XXIII, chap. 15.

15 DDEL, 1074.

16 Pensées: 311, 367; EL, XXV, chap. 15.

17 DDEL, 1074; my italics.

18 Ibid., 1075.

19 Ibid,, 1002.

20 EL, 692.

21 See Conclusion.

22 Anticipating the multiplier in Pensées: “A Monsieur Domville,” 1883.

23 Mainly in EL, XX-XXII; Pensées: 231, 295, 300, 311, 336, 337, 339, 344–8, 355, 662, 670, 691, 709, 1773, 1884, 1952, 1966–2034; MDE, 66–71; Préparation de l'esprit des lois, 9–38; CGR, I, III, IV, X, XIV–XVII, XXI, XXIII; LP, 329–31, 338–9, 348–53, 360–2.

24 EL, 599.

25 Encouragement aux sciences, 53–7.

26 Voyages, 901.

27 Ibid., 907.

28 Ibid., 898–9.

29 EL, 497; my italics.

30 Encouragement aux sciences, 56.

31 EL, 334.

32 LP, 159–60; my italics.

33 EL, 275.

34 Ibid., XXII.

35 Ibid., 651.

36 Ibid., 648.

37 Ibid., 647.

38 DCGR, 211

39 Préparation de l'esprit des lois, 16.

40 LP, 286.

41 Préparation de l''esprit des lois, 17.

42 Réflexions sur la monarchie universelle, 31.

43 Préparation de l'esprit des lois, 17–18; my italics.

44 EL, 585.

45 Ibid., 604.

46 Ibid., V, chap. 8.

47 Ibid., XX, chaps. 19 and 20.

48 Ibid., 593.

49 Ibid., XX, chap. 13.

50 Pensées: 1985, 2032.

51 EL, 585.

52 Ibid., 586.

53 Ibid., 280; my italics.

54 Ibid., 591.

55 Pensées: 1990.

56 DDEL, 1081.

57 EL, 601.

58 Réflexions sur la monarchie universelle, 34.

59 Ibid., 20.

60 EL, 600.

61 Ibid., 641.

62 Spengler, O., French Predecessors of Malthus (Durham, NC, 1942), 213–63.Google Scholar

63 See Schumpeter, Joseph A., History of Economic Analysis (New York, 1950), 253.Google Scholar

64 Ibid.

65 Essai sur les moeurs, and “Population” in Oeuvres.

66 See the Abbé Raynal's celebrated work. A Philosophical History of the Settlement and Trade of the Europeans in the East and West Indies, translated by Justamond, J. O. (London, 1798).Google Scholar

67 LP, 296. Montesquieu's principal treatment of population, and all that follows below, can be found in LP, 295–317, but also scattered about in EL.

68 LP, 313.

69 Pensées: 1976.

70 DDEL, 1093.

71 LP, 287.

72 Pensées: 1970.

73 DDEL, 1093.

74 LP, 296.

75 Ibid., 297; my italics.

76 Ibid., 313–14.

77 DDEL, 1093–4.

78 EL, 710.

79 LP, 297.

80 DDEL, 683.

81 EL, 263.

82 Ibid., 294; my italics.

83 Ibid., 294–5.

84 Ibid., 352.