A Political and Social History of Modern Europe Part 44

In fact, it were better, he contended, that all men should be savages, than that a few of the most cunning, cruel, and greedy should make slaves of the rest. His love of nature, his contempt for the silly showiness and shallow hypocrisy of eighteenth-century society, made the idea a favorite one. He loved to dream of the times [Footnote: It must be confessed that here Rousseau was dreaming of times that probably never existed.] when men were all free and equal, when n.o.body claimed to own the land which G.o.d had made for all, when there were no wars to kill, no taxes to oppress, no philosophers to deceive the people.

In an essay inquiring _What is the Origin of Inequality among Men_ (1753), Rousseau sought to show how vanity, greed, and selfishness had found lodgment in the hearts of these "simple savages," how the strongest had fenced off plots of land for themselves and forced the weak to acknowledge the right of private property. This, said Rousseau, was the real origin of inequality among men, of the tyranny of the strong over the weak; and this law of private property "for the profit of a few ambitious men, subjected thenceforth all the human race to labor, servitude, and misery."

The idea was applied to government in a treatise ent.i.tled the _Social Contract_ (1761). The "social-contract" theory was not new, but Rousseau made it famous. He taught that government, law, and social conventions were the outcome of an agreement or contract by which at the misty dawn of history all members of the state had voluntarily bound themselves. All governments exercised their power in last a.n.a.lysis by virtue of this social contract, by will of the people.

Laws, therefore, should be submitted to popular vote. The republic is the best form of government, because it is the most sensitive to the desires of the people. This idea of "popular sovereignty," or rule of the people, was in men's minds when they set up a republic in France fourteen years after the death of Rousseau.

Rousseau's cry, "Back to nature," had still another aspect. He said that children should be allowed to follow their natural inclinations, instead of being driven to study. They should learn practical, useful things, instead of Latin and Greek. "Let them learn what they must do when they are men, and not what they must forget."

It is hard to fix limits to the influence of Rousseau's writings. True, both the orthodox Catholics and the philosophical Deists condemned him.

But his followers were many, both bourgeois and n.o.ble. "Back to nature"

became the fad of the day, and court ladies pretended to live a "natural" life and to go fis.h.i.+ng. His theory of the social contract, his contention that wealth should not be divided among a few, his idea that the people should rule themselves,--these were to be the inspiration of the republican stage of the French Revolution, and in time to permeate all Europe.

[Sidenote: Beccaria]

The spirit of reform was applied not only against the clergy, the n.o.bles, the monarchy, and faulty systems of law and education, but likewise to the administration of justice. Hitherto the most barbarous "punishments" had been meted out. A pickpocket might be hung for stealing a couple of s.h.i.+llings [Footnote: In England.]; for a more serious offense the criminal might have his bones broken and then be laid on his back on a cart-wheel, to die in agony while crowds looked on and jeered. In a book ent.i.tled _Crimes and Punishments_ (1764), an Italian marquis of the name of Beccaria (1738-1794) held that such punishments were not only brutal and barbarous, but did not serve to prevent crimes as effectually as milder sentences, promptly and surely administered. Beccaria's ideas are the basis of our modern laws, although the death penalty still lingers in a few cases.

[Sidenote: Political Economy: the Physiocrats]

In yet another sphere--that of economics--philosophers were examining the old order of things, and asking, as ever, "Is it reasonable?" As we have repeatedly observed, most governments had long followed the mercantilist plan more or less consistently. But in the eighteenth century, Francois Quesnay, a bourgeois physician at the court of Louis XV, announced to his friends that mercantilism was all wrong. He became the center of a little group of philosophers who called themselves "economists," and who taught that a nation's wealth comes from farming and mining; that manufacturers and traders produce nothing new, but merely exchange or transport commodities. The manufacturers and merchants should therefore be untaxed and unhampered. _Laissez- faire_--"Let them do as they will." Let the farmers pay the taxes.

The foremost disciple of _laisser-faire_ in France was Turgot (1727-1781). As minister of finance under Louis XVI he attempted to abolish duties and restrictions on commerce, but his efforts were only partially successful.

[Sidenote: Adam Smith]

Meanwhile, a Scotchman, who had visited France and had known Quesnay, was conveying the new ideas across the Channel. It was Adam Smith, the "father of political economy." Smith was quite in harmony with the philosophic spirit, with its "natural rights," "natural religion," and "natural laws." He was a professor of "moral philosophy" in the University of Glasgow, and as an incident of his philosophical speculations, he thought out a system of political economy, _i.e._, the "laws" by which a nation might increase its wealth, on the lines suggested by Quesnay. Adam Smith's famous book _The Wealth of Nations_ appeared in 1776, the year of American independence. It was a declaration of independence for industry. Let each man, each employer of labor, each seller of merchandise follow his own personal business interests without let or hindrance, for in so doing he is "led by an invisible hand" to promote the good of all. Let the government abolish all monopolies, [Footnote: He was somewhat inconsistent in approving joint-stock monopolies and s.h.i.+pping regulations.] all restrictions on trade, all customs duties, all burdens on industry.

Thus only can the true wealth of a nation be promoted.

Smith's opinions were so plausible and his arguments so ingenious that his doctrines steadily gained in influence, and in the first half of the nineteenth century pretty generally triumphed. In actual practice the abolition of restrictions on industry was destined to give free rein to the avarice and cruelty of the most selfish employers, to enrich the bourgeoisie, and to leave the lower cla.s.ses more miserable than ever. The "Wealth of Nations" was to be the wealth of the bourgeoisie. But meanwhile, it was to destroy mercantilism.

[Sidenote: Conclusion]

We have now completed our survey of the social, religious, and intellectual conditions in the Europe of the eighteenth century. Before our eyes have pa.s.sed poverty-stricken peasants plowing their fields, prosperous merchants who demand power, frivolous n.o.bles squandering their lives and fortunes, worldly bishops neglecting their duties, humble priests remaining faithful, sober Quakers refusing to fight, earnest astronomers who search the skies, sarcastic Deists who scoff at priests, and bourgeois philosophers who urge reform. The procession is not quite done. Last of all come the kings in their royal ermine and ministers in robes of state. To them we dedicate a new chapter. It will be the last occasion on which kings will merit such detailed attention.

ADDITIONAL READING

GENERAL SOCIAL CONDITIONS IN EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY EUROPE. Brief outlines: J. H. Robinson and C. A. Beard, _The Development of Modern Europe_, Vol. I (1907), ch. viii, ix; H. E. Bourne, _The Revolutionary Period in Europe, 1763-1815_ (1914), ch. i, iii; Clive Day, _History of Commerce_ (1907). More detailed accounts: _Cambridge Modern History_, Vol. VI; and _Histoire generale_, Vol. VII, ch. xiii-xvii. The most scholarly and exhaustive study of social conditions is that of Maxime Kovalevsky, _Die oekonomische Entwicklung Europas bis zum Beginn der kapitalistischen Wirtschaftsform_, trans. into German from Russian by Leo Motzkin, 7 vols. (1901-1914), especially Vols. VI, VII.

FRENCH SOCIETY ON THE EVE OF THE REVOLUTION. Shailer Mathews, _The French Revolution_ (reprint, 1912), ch. i-v, a clear summary; E. J.

Lowell, _The Eve of the French Revolution_ (1892), probably the best introduction in English; Alexis de Tocqueville, _The State of Society in France before the Revolution of 1789_, Eng. trans. by Henry Reeve, 3d ed. (1888), a brilliant and justly famous work; H. A. Taine, _The Ancient Regime_, Eng. trans. by John Durand, new rev. ed. (1896), another very celebrated work, better on the literary and philosophical aspects of the Old Regime than on the economic; Albert Sorel, _L'Europe et la Revolution francaise, Vol. I (1885) of this monumental history is an able presentation of French social conditions in the eighteenth century; Arthur Young, _Travels in France, 1787, 1788, and 1789_, valuable observations of a contemporary English gentleman-farmer on conditions in France, published in several editions, notably in the Bohn Library. Detailed treatises in French: _Histoire de France_, Vol.

IX, Part I (1910), _Regne de Louis XVI, 1774-1789_, by H. Carre, P.

Sagnac, and E. Lavisse, especially livres III, IV; Emile Leva.s.seur, _Histoire des cla.s.ses ouvrieres et de l'industrie en France avant 1789_, Vol. II (1901), livre VII; Maxime Kovalevsky, _La France economique et sociale a la veille de la Revolution_, 2 vols. (1909- 1911), an admirable study of common life both rural and urban; Georges d'Avenel, _Histoire economique de la propriete, des salaires, etc., 1200-1800_, 6 vols. (1894-1912), elaborate treatments of such topics as money, land, salaries, the wealthy and bourgeois cla.s.ses, the growth of private expenses, etc.; Albert Babeau's careful monographs on many phases of the Old Regime, such as _Les voyageurs en France_ (1885), _La ville_ (1884), _La vie rurale_ (1885), _Les artisans et les domestiques_ (1886), _Les bourgeois_ (1886), _La vie militaire_, 2 vols. (1890), _Le village_ (1891), _La province_, 2 vols. (1894); Nicolas Kareiev, _Les paysans et la question paysanne en France dans le dernier quart du XVIIIe siecle_, Fr. trans. (1899); Edme Champion, _La France d'apres les cahiers de 1789_ (1897). Also see books listed under THE FRENCH MONARCHY, 1743-1789, p. 463, below.

ENGLISH SOCIETY IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. Brief surveys: A. L. Cross, _History of England and Greater Britain_ (1914), ch. xliv; G. T.

Warner, _Landmarks in English Industrial History_, 11th ed. (1912), ch.

xiv; H. de B. Gibbins, _Industry in England_, 6th ed. (1910), ch. xvii- xx; G. H. Perris, _The Industrial History of Modern England_ (1914), ch. i. Fuller treatments: H. D. Traill and J. S. Mann (editors), _Social England_, illus. ed., 6 vols. in 12 (1909), ch. xvi-xviii; W.

G. Sydney, _England and the English in the Eighteenth Century_, 2 vols.

(1891); E. S. Roscoe, _The English Scene in the Eighteenth Century_ (1912); Sir H. T. Wood, _Industrial England in the Middle of the Eighteenth Century_ (1910); Sidney and Beatrice Webb, _English Local Government from the Revolution to the Munic.i.p.al Corporations Act, 1688- 1835, The Manor and the Borough_, 2 parts (1908), and _The Story of the King's Highway_ (1913); W. E. H. Lecky, _A History of England in the Eighteenth Century_, London ed., 7 vols. (1907), particularly full on social and intellectual conditions. Special studies and monographs: A.

Andreades, _History of the Bank of England_, Eng. trans. by Christabel Meredith (1909), an authoritative review by a Greek scholar; Sir Walter Besant, _London in the Eighteenth Century_ (1903), charmingly written but not always trustworthy; J. L. and B. Hammond, _The Village Labourer, 1760-1832_ (1911); J. E. Thorold Rogers, _History of Agriculture and Prices in England_, 7 vols. (1866-1902), a monumental work, of which Vol. VII deals with the eighteenth century; R. E.

Prothero, _English Farming Past and Present_ (1912); E. C. K. Gonner, _Common Land and Inclosure_ (1912); A. H. Johnson, _The Disappearance of the Small Landowner_ (1909); Wilhelm Hasbach, _A History of the English Agricultural Labourer_, new ed. trans. into English by Ruth Kenyon (1908); R. M. Gamier, _History of the English Landed Interest, its Customs, Laws and Agriculture_, 2 vols. (1892-1893), and, by the same author, _Annals of the British Peasantry_ (1895). For interesting contemporary accounts of English agriculture in the eighteenth century, see the journals of Arthur Young, _A Six Weeks' Tour through the Southern Counties_ (1768), _A Six Months' Tour through the North of England_, 4 vols. (1791), and _The Farmer's Tour through the East of England_, 4 vols. (1791). Also see books listed under THE BRITISH MONARCHY, 1760-1800, pp. 461 f., below.

SPECIAL STUDIES OF SOCIAL CONDITIONS IN OTHER COUNTRIES. For Scotland: H. G. Graham, _Social Life in Scotland in the Eighteenth Century_, 2 vols. (1900). For Hungary: Henry Marczali, _Hungary in the Eighteenth Century_ (1910). For Russia: James Mavor, _An Economic History of Russia_, Vol. I (1914), Book II, ch. i-iv. For Spain: Georges Desdevises du Dezert, _L'Espagne de l'ancien regime_, 3 vols. (1897-1904). For the Germanies: Karl Biedermann, _Deutschland im achtsehnten Jahrhundert_, 2 vols. in 3 (1867-1880).

ECCLESIASTICAL AFFAIRS IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. The general histories of Christianity, cited in the bibliography to Chapter IV, above, should be consulted. Additional information can be gathered from the following. On the Catholic Church: William Barry, _The Papacy and Modern Times_ (1911), ch. v; _Cambridge Modern History_, Vol. V (1908), ch. iv, on Gallicanism and Jansenism, by Viscount St. Cyres, a vigorous opponent of Ultramontanism; _Histoire generale_, Vol. VI, ch. vi, and Vol. VII, ch. xvii, both by emile Chenon; Joseph de Maistre, _Du pape_, 24th ed. (1876), and _De l'eglise gallicane_, most celebrated treatments of Gallicanism from the standpoint of an Ultramontane and orthodox Roman Catholic; C. A. Sainte-Beuve, _Port-Royal_, 2d ed., 5 vols. (1860), the best literary account of Jansenism; R. B. C. Graham, _A Vanished Arcadia: being some account of the Jesuits in Paraguay, 1607 to 1767_ (1901); Paul de Crousaz-Cretet, _L'eglise et l'etat, ou les deux puissances au XVIIIe siecle, 1713-1789_ (1893), on the relations of church and state; Leon Mention, _Doc.u.ments relatifs aux rapports du clerge avec la royaute de 1682 a 1789_, 2 vols. (1893- 1903), containing many important doc.u.ments. On Protestantism in England: H. O. Wakeman, _An Introduction to the History of the Church of England_, 5th ed. (1898), ch. xviii, xix; J. H. Overton and Frederic Relton, _A History of the Church of England, 1714-1800_ (1906), being Vol. VII of a comprehensive work ed. by W. R. W. Stephens and William Hunt; John Stoughton, _Religion under Queen Anne and the Georges, 1702- 1800_, 2 vols. (1878); H. W. Clark, _History of English Nonconformity_, 2 vols. (1911-1913), especially Vol. II, Book IV, ch. i, ii, on Methodism; W. C. Braithwaite, _The Beginnings of Quakerism_ (1912); F.

J. Snell, _Wesley and Methodism_ (1900); and T. E. Thorpe, _Joseph Priestley_ (1906).

DEISM AND THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.

_Cambridge Modern History_, Vol. V, ch. xxiii, and Vol. VIII, ch. i; _Histoire generale_, Vol. VI, ch. x, and Vol. VII, ch. xv, two excellent chapters on natural science, 1648-1788, by Paul Tannery; Sir Oliver Lodge, _Pioneers of Science_ (1893); Sir Leslie Stephen, _History of English Thought in the Eighteenth Century_, 3d ed., 2 vols.

(1902), an interesting account of the English Deists and of the new political and economic theorists, and, by the same author, _English Literature and Society in the Eighteenth Century_ (1909); Edmund Gosse, _A History of Eighteenth Century Literature, 1660-1780_ (1911); J. M.

Robertson, _A Short History of Free Thought_, 3d rev. ed., 2 vols.

(1915), a sympathetic treatment of deism and rationalism; C. S. Devas, _The Key to the World's Progress_ (1906), suggestive criticism of the thought of the eighteenth century from the standpoint of a well- informed Roman Catholic. On the most celebrated French philosophers of the time, see the entertaining and enthusiastic biographies by John (Viscount) Morley, _Rousseau_, 2 vols. (1873), _Diderot and the Encyclopaedists_, 2 vols. (1891), _Voltaire_ (1903), and the essays on Turgot, etc., scattered throughout his _Critical Miscellanies_, 4 vols.

(1892-1908). There is a convenient little biography of _Montesquieu_ by Albert Sorel, Eng. trans. by Gustave Ma.s.son (1887), and useful monographs by J. C. Collins, _Bolingbroke, a Historical Study; and Voltaire in England_ (1886). Such epochal works as Montesquieu's _Spirit of the Laws_, Voltaire's _Letters on the English_ and _Philosophical Dictionary_, and Rousseau's _Social Contract_ and _emile_, are readily procurable in English. On the rise of political economy: Henry Higgs, _The Physiocrats_ (1897); Charles Gide and Charles Rist, _A History of Economic Doctrines from the Time of the Physiocrats_, Eng. trans. (1915), Book I, ch. i, ii; L. L. Price, _A Short History of Political Economy in England from Adam Smith to Arnold Toynbee_, 7th ed. (1911); R. B. (Viscount) Haldane, _Life of Adam Smith_ (1887) in the "Great Writers" Series; John Rae, _Life of Adam Smith_ (1895), containing copious extracts from Smith's letters and papers; Georges Weulersse, _Le mouvement physiocratique en France de 1756 a 1770_, 2 vols. (1910), scholarly and elaborate. There is a two- volume edition of Adam Smith's _Wealth of Nations_ (1910) in "Everyman's Library," with an admirable introductory essay by E. R. A.

Seligman.

CHAPTER XIV

EUROPEAN GOVERNMENTS IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

[Sidenote: General]

In the foregoing chapter we have seen how the social structure of the eighteenth century rested on injustice, poverty, and suffering; we have listened to the complaints of the bourgeoisie and to their demands for reform. Philosophers might plead for reform, but only the king could grant it. For in him were vested all powers of government: he was the absolute monarch.

Such was the situation in virtually every important country in Europe.

In Great Britain alone were the people even reputed to have a share in the government, and to Great Britain the Voltaires and the Montesquieus of the Continent turned for a model in politics. Let us join them in considering the peculiar organization of the British monarchy, and then we shall observe how the other governments of Europe met the demand for reform.

THE BRITISH MONARCHY

[Sidenote: England. Scotland]

In the eighteenth century, what was the British monarchy? It was, first of all, the government of England (which included Wales). Secondly, it embraced Scotland, for since 1603 Scotland and England had been subject to the same king, and in 1707 by the Act of Union the two kingdoms had been united to form the monarchy of "Great Britain," with a common king and a common Parliament.

[Sidenote: Great Britain]

The British monarchy was properly, then, the government of united England (Wales) and Scotland. But in addition the crown had numerous subordinate possessions: the royal colonies, [Footnote: The royal colonies were, in 1800: Newfoundland (1583), Barbados (1605), Bermudas (1609), Gambia (c. 1618), St. Christopher (1623), Nevis (1628), Montserrat (1632), Antigua (1632), Honduras (1638), St. Lucia (1638), Gold Coast (c. 1650), St. Helena (1651), Jamaica (1655), Bahamas (1666), Virgin Islands (1666), Gibraltar (1704), Hudson Bay Territory (1713), Nova Scotia (1713), New Brunswick (1713), Quebec, Ontario, and Prince Edward Island (1763), Dominica (17633), St. Vincent (1763), Grenada (1763), Tobago (1763), Falkland (1765), Pitcairn (1780), Straits Settlements (1786 ff.), Sierra Leone (1787), New South Wales (1788), Ceylon (1795), Trinidad (1797), and, under the East India Company, Madras (1639), Bombay (1661), and Bengal (1633-1765).] and Ireland. For these dependencies the home government appointed governors, made laws, and levied taxes, in theory at least; but they were possessions rather than integral parts of the monarchy.

[Sidenote: Ireland]

A few words should be said in explanation of the political status of Ireland under the British crown. The English kings had begun their conquests in that island as far back as the twelfth century; and by dint of much bloodshed and many efforts they had long maintained possession. In the seventeenth century Oliver Cromwell had put down a bitter revolt and had encouraged Protestant English and Scotch immigrants to settle in the north and east, taking the land from the native Irishmen, who were Roman Catholics. An Irish parliament had existed since the middle ages, but from the close of the fifteenth century its acts to be valid required the approval of the English Privy Council, and from the middle of the seventeenth century Roman Catholics were debarred from it. In 1782, however, while Great Britain was engaged in the War of American Independence, the Protestants in Ireland secured the right to make most of their own laws, and ten years later the Catholic disqualifications were removed. From 1782 to 1801, Ireland retained this half-way independence; but a Protestant minority actually controlled the Irish Parliament, incurring the dislike of the Roman Catholic Irish and of the British government, so that in 1800, following an Irish revolt, an Act of Union was pa.s.sed, according to which, in 1801, Great Britain and Ireland became the United Kingdom.

Thenceforth Ireland was represented by 28 peers and 100 Commoners in the Parliament of the United Kingdom (often called, carelessly, the British Parliament).

It may be said, then, that except during the brief period of Irish semi-independence (1782-1801), the British Parliament governed not only Great Britain, but Ireland and the crown colonies as well. How the British monarchy was governed, we have now to discover.

[Sidenote: The King and his Nominal Powers]