Contenu du sommaire : Le libéralisme à l'épreuve : de l'empire aux nations. (Adam Smith et l'économie coloniale)

Adam Smith and the Colonial Scheme of the Future of an Illusion As ail important books do, the Wealth of Nations is written to fight against an adversary. Adam Smith' adversary is clearly the Mercantile System. However Smith builds a theory of his adversary. The Mercantile System, the Colonial System and the Sovereign Companies are the effects of merchants's partiality and rethorics (I). Consequently, the Mercantile System is also the effect of the Love of Systems, whose importance is emphasised in the Theory of Moral Sentiments (II). So the Mercantile System is in a sense necessary.

The paper deals with Adam Smith's analysis of and opinions on British colonial policy during the American revolution and its immediate aftermath. Smith was, of course, an opponent of mercantile aims and methods of regu- lating colonial trade. He was equally concerned with the fiscal burdens imposed on Britain by rising public debt and the civil and military costs of maintaining an empire. Unlike many of his contemporaries, therefore, Smith did not regard the loss of empire as disadvantageous from an economic or political perspective ; his « Utopian » proposals for an imperial federation were designed to emphasise to only kinf of empire that could be justified, namely one in which both free trade and fiscal harmonization were achieved. Although Smith's opinions on American economic prospects were as optimistic as thore of Thomas Paine, he refused to make the radical connnection between républicanisme and economic performance and was unsympathetic to colonial constitutional complaints and the neo-Lockean ideas on contract and rights of resistance upon which they were based. Hence the lack of histo- rial basis for those attempts to make Smith an honorary founding father of a « bourgeois » or « liberal » integration of the American national identity.

This paper is concerned with Smith's thoughts about american colonies. The first part studies remarks in the Lectures on Jurisprudence and the Early Draft about indians and slavery. Since 1767, the colonial conflict is the very core of debates. The paper compares Smith's ideas with those of contemporaries (Pownall, Franklin, Ticker and Burke) on the « gravitation » theory which implies that the center of the empire must move from London and cross the atlantic ocean (2d part). In the third part, the paper studies colonial matters in the Wealth of Nations and in the 1778 memorandum.

It is generally recognized that Adam Smith argued in The Wealth of Nations in favor of independence for the American colonies. The explicit grounds on which Smith based this argument have not been held to close scrutiny, however. In recent years, Donald Winch has attempted to right the balance between studies of Smith's economics and his politics. Which raised the following questions : Did Smith favor independence of the American colonies on political or economic grounds ? Since Smith was not always explicit in this regard, what particular grounds can be inferred from what is generally known about Smith's politics and/or his economics ? This paper analyzes and explains the grounds for Smith's argument in favor or American independence. It adopts a holistic approach that seeks to integrate Smith's political and economic thought, and utilizes a benefit-cost framework to explicate Smith's final position on the question of American independence.

Abstract : Adam Smith and the Pennsylvany : the Invisible Hand and the Deadalian Wings of Paper Money The British colonies of North America, and especially Pennsylvany, appear to be a crucial theoretical topic in The Wealth of Nations. Their expe- rience confutes the basic thesis of mercantilism : have they not been growing very rapidly with a negative balance of commerce ? Analysing Smith's argumentation on this point leads to an interpration of Smith's theory, which is at variance with the one traditionnaly held by historians of economic thought. First, the « invisible hand » has nothing to do with the market mecanism. It manifests its effects through two propensities participating of human nature. If institutions or policies, as the ones achieved by mercantilisme in Europe, do not counteract these two propensities, then a nation follows the « natural course of things », as America does. Second, all the systems of paper money are good, though « deadalian », in the sense that they have to be managed by deadalian technicians. Regarding the European circumstances, Smith advocates the rule that compels the banks to pay their notes in gold. But, concerning America, he does not condemn banking systems formed of only one state bank, without any kind of gold reserve.

Having offered some account of Smith's assessment of the conduct of the War of Independence, the paper is divided into three main parts. In Part I we consider Smith's account of the mercantile relationship which existed between Great Britain and her American Colonies. This relationship is shown to have conferred major benefits on both parties, économie and military, through providing a system of complementary markets. But in Part II Smith is seen to have concentrated on the point that the mercantile policy which he described was fundamentally flawed ; flawed in that the rapid rate of growth in America would eventually confront the restraints currently imposed upon her. The strategy was also flawed, on Smith's account, in the Great Britain's rate of growth had been adversely affected by the link with America. The last section of the argument is concerned with Smith's preferred solution : an incorporating union which would eventually see the transfer of economic and political power to Philadelphia.

The « speech for conciliation with the colonies » (1775) given by Edmund Burke, on behalf of the whigs, invited the House of Commons to give up its taxation right as far as it concerned the american colonies. Such a proposition based on political pragmatism aimed over all to safeguard the economical interests of Great Britain ; according to Burke's views even if the mercantilist system he disagreed with was brought to an end, the british interests would be sharply threatened if the colonies were going out of the empire.

An analysis of why Adam Smith's perfect market is not defined at the levai of the whole world but rather at the levai of the « nation ». It becomes clear that Adam Smith sees a justification for numerous interferences with the maijet, once one moves beyond the sphere of a single sovereign state. He also sees justifications for enlarging state boundaries.

J.B. Say's first considerations about colonies are related to the slavery question. The problem of profitability in slaves employment induces J.B. Say to call into question the colonial system (1). British colonial system seems to be the cause (or the effect) of a disequilibrium. For manufactures need colonies as a débouché (2). J.B. Say's political thought about british colonial system is studied in the third part of this article. J.B. Say moves from being in favour of a military solution to a more peaceful (and economical) solution.

The french merchants are, in the XVIIIe century, supporters of free trade in a way which is very close of the ideas of Adam Smith. But this general freedom is defended only in individuals terms. The merchant are opposed to the shortcoming to the colonial monopoly and leave out the play of freedom withs foreigners. They demand also bonus and encouragements from the king. This contradiction is also found during the Revolution, when the merchants behind general idea of freedom, succeed in keeping slavery and slave-trade.

Bentham's opinion about colonies is based on three points : 1) In the field of international relations, colonies create costly conflitcs. 2) In the field of economics, Bentham shows the low profitability of capital because mother country bears all the costs. Especially, he emphasizes (in opposition to Smith) that the amount of exchanges is limited by the stocks of capital, and not by the extent of the market.

Between his father, Jean-Baptiste Say, a brilliant theorist of economic liberalism, and his uncle, Louis Say, the founder of famous sugar houses, Horace Say (1794-1860), liked to present himself as both a practical man and a technician of economy. He was able to carefully analyze the trade relations between Brazil and France in a work published in 1839, thanks to a long experience in the field, at a time when the old Portuguese colony was becoming a young indépendant State. How could his observations on the expansion of international trade be the matter of a real liberal programme of economic development of the Empire ? What were his commitments, his Utopian views, his limits ? At the time

The colonial empire has been weakened by the Revolution and the awrs of the imperial period. In the mind of the merchants but also among the manufacturers it obvious that it is necessary to rebuilt an empire at the time of the restauration of monarchy. In spite of a lot of difficulties and thanks to a large protection of trade, the colonial empire reduced to the small Antillas, is able to increase the production of sugar which stays the meantime expensive in comparison with the international prices. The high cost of french sugar, breaks the agreement which had been built on the question of colonial empire and strengthen the liberal movement especialy in Paris where the ideas of Smith has been rediscovered.