Page:The wealth of nations, volume 1.djvu/36

 Colbert in France, and Walpole in England. Protection was one of the great cornerstones of the system, since by protection the imports of a country were diminished, even if the exports were not increased. The aim of middle-class statesmanship up to this time had been to secure monopolies. This notion of monopoly to be acquired by high imposts and other means was a relic of medieval methods, albeit applied for the advantage of a class, which as a class embodied the new principle opposed to that of the Middle Ages. It is needless to say, that with the more complete development of that principle and of its correlative class, it soon became apparent that while subserving the immediate ends of the individuals then representing the latter, it was really an obstacle to its complete success as a class. The unconsciousness of this fact is perceptible even in Adam Smith, who at times attacks protection, etc., apparently in the belief that he is attacking the special interests of the trading classes as such, whereas he is of course really placing those interests on a solid theoretic foundation.

The reaction against the fundamental principle of the mercantile system, that money was the sole repository of wealth, with its corollary that trade was the only means of attaining it, appeared in France in the guise of the "physiocratic" system, which maintained that land was the sole repository of wealth, with its corollary that agriculture was the sole means of realizing it. The ideas of this school first originated with a merchant named Cantillon, but did not attract attention until definitely formulated in detail by François Quesnay and Jean de