Gournay: “sovereigns need traders”
What is commonly called the circle of Gournay is a network of traders, civil servants and men of letters, formed in the early 1750s at the instigation of Jacques Vincent de Gournay,[63] newly appointed intendant of commerce.
The circle is known for its activity of disseminating the English “science of trade” and promoting some of its principles amongst educated circles and the French high-level administration.[64]A trader from Saint-Malo, the son of shipowners, in 1751, Gournay bought the office of intendant of commerce with a clearly stated objective: to bring together two interests, that of the State and that of maritime trade, and to instil the idea that France could catch up with England and the Netherlands in trade. He wrote in 1758,
When I wanted the position of intendant of commerce, I was prompted by the hope of bringing together trade and traders with the influential people a little more. I hoped that if this state could be seen more clearly and be better known by superiors, it would acquire in France the same degree of favour and consideration that it enjoys amongst our neighbours.
(to Daniel-Charles Trudaine,[65] in Gournay 1993, 106)
Gournay’s economic work consists mainly of the memoirs written between 1751 and 1757, a translation of Child’s book titled Traites sur le commerce et sur les avantages qui resultent de la reduction de l'interest de l'argent (1754) and Remarques left handwritten (c.1752). The influence of the English author here is obvious, Gournay ([c.1752] 1983, 437) repeats verbatim the principles of trade laid down by this author in his book; that of Melon is plausible, he takes from him the slogan “liberty and protection” ([c.1752] 1983, 421).[66] Indeed, he does not claim to have brought to light new principles in the field of commerce (Gournay 1993, 105).
He sums up the science of commerce as follows: it is “nothing other than knowing how to take the most of the advantages of one’s country, to put money and people into action, and to develop the land” ([c.1752] 1983, 285).In a memoir written towards the end of the Austrian War of Succession (c. 1747-48), Gournay expresses, in a Melonian manner, the idea that, once peace has been established,
it will be the nation that is able to obtain... the most advantages from its commerce, which will become the richest nation and therefore superior to others We shall have to contest these advantages of commerce with two
nations (the English and the Dutch), which know no other interest than this, and which never separate it from that of their State.
(Gournay 1993, 3)
The memoir contains several assertions that are reminiscent of Melon, namely: (i) in a situation of peace, nations do not give up their quest for power, but transpose their rivalry into commerce; (ii) France, whose productions are abundant and varied, and whose inhabitants are industrious, can acquire a superiority of power; (iii) this superiority is gained by a substantial navy and a moderate Navigation Act compatible with freedom of trade (1993, 4).[67] Gournay sees an advantage in this Act, that of establishing direct trade with Russia without going through the Dutch entrepot, which enriches itself by selling French products in Russia and Russian products to France. Direct trade could also herald prospects for French manufacturing which would compete with that of England already present in the Russian market.
The trade policy advocated by Gournay in this memoir also proposes the following measures: create a fishing company in Bayonne to challenge Dutch control over whaling; protect the French slave trade by fighting against English slave trading companies; plant tobacco in the French colonies in America to avoid buying that of Virginia and Maryland from the English; establish a trade treaty including a reduction in customs duties with Spain, which is the most advantageous country for French trade; reduce interest on money; associate nobles with commerce, because nothing “would encourage the nation more to go into trade than to see the greatest lords of the Kingdom learn about it and to sometimes risk part of the surplus of their property with it” (1993, 12).
The science of commerce is also a reflection on greater freedom in the organisation of the domestic economy.
This is expressed in the Memoire sur les communau- tes (1753) concerning the Lyon silk trade. Here, Gournay pleads for “liberty and competition”, arguing that this industry would be more competitive if it employed more workers with fewer regulations and removed two harmful monopolies - that of manufacturers and that of workers - preventing it from competing with the free English and Dutch silk trade (1993, 23-4). The subject is generalised in the Memoire sur la contrebande (1753):We do not find gold and silver like the Spaniards by digging into the earth. So we can only attract it through labour; or we will enrich ourselves whenever we are put in a position to work more easily and more cheaply than any other nation in Europe.
(Gournay 1993, 33)
It is in this memoir that he concludes with a phrase that has become famous, “lais- ser faire, laisser passer”. “These few words, laisser faire and laisser passer, being two continual sources of actions, would therefore be for us two continual sources of wealth” (in Gournay 1993, 34). As the preceding pages show, this phrase has, however, a less radical significance than in Pierre de Boisguilbert or, later, in A.R.J. Turgot, whatever the latter suggested in the eulogy he wrote on the death of Gournay.
It should be noted that nowhere does Gournay make major developments in the economy and domestic circulation. He endorses the idea that greater circulation requires a reduction in domestic customs duties: the corn trade, he notes, is free in England and hampered in France, even from one province to another (1993, 61). He acknowledges, without dwelling on it, that “agriculture and trade [are] the only two sources of wealth in any State whatsoever” (1993, 44) and that two classes of men, labourers and people from industry and trade must be encouraged. Unlike Melon, who pointed to the fraudulent greed of traders, he complains that their merit is not sufficiently recognised: their interest is hardly different from that of the nation.
“Europe is becoming a commercial area, sovereigns need traders”, he wrote to Trudaine. This is why the former must do “to attract men to trade and to keep them there what they have done to attract men to the military state and to keep them there” (10 April 1754, in Gournay 1993, 192).The best way to promote trade is to involve “the high nobility and the most distinguished men of the robe” (1993, 12). The idea of a “trading nobility” (“noblesse commerςante,,), contrary to Montesquieu’s position, shows Gournay that commerce has no constitutional definition and no corrupting effect on the monarchy. And if, he concedes, monarchies are less sensitive to the spirit and the principles of commerce than republics, once initiated by traders, monarchs will have a much easier time than republics to extend and support their commerce, “because it is easier for them to remove the obstacles that delay its progress and destroy false maxims” (Gournay c.1752 [1983], 353).
5.