Jeux de mots, narrative and economic writing: The rhetoric of anti-physiocracy in French economic periodicals (1764–1769)

Abstract

This article analyses the extensive debate that took place from 1764 to 1769 between, on the one hand, François Quesnay and the Physiocrats and, on the other hand, a group of authors led by François Véron de Forbonnais. In this article, we argue that these exchanges have, to a large extent, structured the anti-physiocratic rhetoric.

Keywords:

• Physiocracy
• anti-physiocracy
• Véron de Forbonnais
• economic periodicals
• rhetoric in economics

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank Arnaud Orain for his comments on an earlier version of this text.

Notes

1 The few examples of texts belonging to the controversy that have been discussed in the secondary literature are “Lettre de M. Alpha…” by Quesnay, De l’exportation et de l’importation des grains and Lettre sur la différence… by Du Pont (1764a, 1764b), and Principes et observations oeconomiques by Forbonnais.

2 For an overview of economic periodicals in the second-half of the century, see Steiner (1996) and Daumalle (2002); specific studies also exist on the following: the Journal d’agriculture, de commerce et de finances (Kempf 1978); the Ephémérides du citoyen (Pellissier 1978; Goutte 1994; Goutte and Klotz 2003).

3 During a short period that covered 1752–1755, the Journal Œconomique published a few ambitious articles written by either the intendant of trade and economic reformer, Vincent de Gournay, or by his associates (see Charles 2011; Orain 2013). However, throughout its whole existence from 1751 to 1771, the Journal Œconomique used a much wider definition of economics, one that was strongly influenced by Linnaeus (see Steiner 1996, 35–37).

4 On this periodical, see Hasquin (1974); see also the headword “Jacques Accarias de Serrione” in Sgard (1999) and the entry “Journal de commerce” in Sgard (1991). From December 1761, the Journal de commerce added “et d’agriculture” to its original title.

5 These projects were sent to the Librairie, which was the central office in eighteenth-century France that granted publishers full privilege and permissions to issue books and periodicals. For the context of the “science of commerce”, see Charles (2008), Charles, Théré, and Lefebvre (2011).

6 The complete title was as follows: Le courtier ou factures des marchandises, tant de celles arrivées aux douanes et aux ports de paris que de celles a vendre dans les provinces. See Bibliothèque Nationale de France (BNF), Manuscrits français (Man. Fr. in the following) 22135, ff. 58–74 – the citation is from folio 59.

7 BNF, Man. Fr. 22135, ff. 75–77. Citations are from ff. 75 and 76.

8 BNF, Man. Fr. 22135, ff. 87–89.

9 BNF, Man. Fr. 22135, ff. 78–86.

10 In early 1762, Bellepierre proposed to Malesherbes that he edited a weekly newspaper called Le Thermomètre du commerce (The Barometer of trade). See BNF, Man. Fr., Nouvelles acquisitions 3348, ff. 247–251. The content he planned for his newspaper was identical to that of either Le courrier du commerce or Le négociant. Like them, he modelled the templates of the British Merchant, which he cited in his proposal.

11 Gazette du Commerce (1763a, 2. Cf. BNF, Manuscrits Français 22084, pieces 75–77). The licence was granted to the Prépaud father and son team on 11 January 1763, and publication began on 1 April of that year. The two Gazettes originally contained four quarto pages, with an occasional two-page supplement. They appeared on Wednesdays and Saturdays.

12 See Anon. (1763) and Gazette du commerce (1763b, n° 29, 31, 32, 38, 48, 60, and 71).

13 It now appeared on Tuesdays and Saturdays with eight quarto pages, and less often with a four-page supplement (two in 1764). Le Rebours's name is not to be found in the dictionaries of the ancien regime French press, edited by Jean Sgard. Charles Le Rebours (c.1731–1776), a former assistant to the Latin teacher at the École Royale Militaire, was a provincial controller of posts from the late 1760s to his death. He was an associate member of the Paris Royal Agricultural Society in 1768 and a full member in 1771. Cf. Archives Nationales, H 1501; Almanach Royal, 1768 and 1771; and the brief article in Michaud (1824, 207–208), which does mention his editorship of the Gazette.

14 Gazette du commerce, n° 14, 17, 18, and 20. The author of the penultimate piece was identified by Du Pont as Forbonnais (cf. Gazette du commerce, n° 62, 4 August: 494), and Forbonnais himself revealed his identity in a later issue (n° 64, 11 August: 510).

15 Journal de la librairie, BNF, MF 22163, f. 109. It was entitled De l’exportation et de l’importation des grains. The first letter is from another physiocrat, probably Saint-Péravy from Orléans; the second is from Forbonnais.

16 Article was specifically identified by Du Pont: Gazette du commerce, n° 102, 22 December: 817–823. Cf. Éphémérides du citoyen, 1769, III: XXIX (Du Pont). There were several others.

17 Gazette du commerce, n° 79 and 94. Du Pont unveiled the true identity of “the Franche-Comté yeoman” in the Journal de l’agriculture, du commerce et des Finances (September 1765: 3–4). Franche-Comté is a mountainous region situated on the border of Switzerland, in Eastern France.

18 Concerning the interest rate, see Gazette du commerce, n° 90 and 102. For L’Averdy's monetary policy, see Félix (1999, 220–221).

19 See Sgard (1999), entry “Pierre Bénézech”. A premier commis was a secretary. It was one of the highest positions in the French administration. They were very well paid and had a considerable political power. See Félix (1996).

20 Prospectus (1765, 4). The author added: “His Majesty's other Ministers… have been so kind as to promise their protection and favour to this enterprise too; …the Offices of the Administration at Court in Paris & in the Kingdom's Provinces, have been invited to contribute to its perfection & usefulness through their regular correspondence”.

21 Abbot Yvon was editor of both the Gazette and Journal from the end of 1766, but we have not been able to determine the exact date of his appointment.

22 Concerning Du Pont's sponsors in early 1765, see his uncompleted autobiography (Du Pont de Nemours 1984, Chapter 15). The most important was Trudaine de Montigny, cf. the two letters to him from Du Pont in his archives: Eleutherian Mills Historical Library, Papers of Pierre-Samuel Du Pont and his two wives, W2-3 and W2-6.

23 For example, the controversy about the unproductiveness (stérilité) of industry, on which Quesnay published a large number of texts in the Journal, began with a question published in the Gazette.

24 These societies were set up at the initiative of L’Averdy's predecessor, Bertin, who was still in the government. For an overview of these societies, see Justin (1935); concerning their political role, see Charles (1999). Gazette, n° 60, 24 December 1765: 474: “The Academies of Agriculture must naturally have a direct influence on our periodical, which is intended in large part for the publication of their work. Some of them in particular have the greatest claims on our gratitude. One is the Le Mans section, which sent us the observations that readers have seen…; another is the Rouen society, which also sent us some valuable pieces; and the Orléans society, where we have four correspondents of singular distinction for their merit and knowledge”.

25 Gazette, n° 9, 29 June 1765 and n° 10, 2 July 1765. See also n° 5, 11, 17–23, etc.

26 Journal, September 1765: XVII–XVIII.

27 Journal, September 1765: XXXV–XLII. The quotation is taken from the last page.

28 In particular, “Observations on natural law”, “Analysis of the arithmetical formula”, and “Economic problem”. See Quesnay (2005, 97–109, 527–544, 597–618).

29 It should be noted that Forbonnais's father was at the head of the Bureau of Le Mans.

30 Pingeron translated from Italian and English mainly historical or geographical accounts and technical monographs on agronomy, industry, architecture, and painting. The only article relevant to matters of political economy concerned Italian experience with cadastral registers; see Journal, November 1768 and the comments it provoked in January and March 1769.

31 Concerning the vocabulary of the physiocrats, see the works of Marie-France Piguet, in particular, Piguet (1996, 1999) and Piguet and Cartelier (1999).

32 For the use of irony by anti-physiocrats, see Orain (submitted).

33 Not until late 1766 did the Gazette, Journal and the Éphémérides take a clear editorial line. Although the Gazette was open to Forbonnais's articles and ideas, it also contained texts favourable to Quesnay's ideas. The Journal, although edited by a Physiocrat, published articles criticising Quesnay's ideas. During their first period, the Éphémérides ranged widely in content, with articles both appreciative and critical of the “new science” of Quesnay.

34 Forbonnais's book was released in March 1767; Le Mercier's followed in July. See BNF, Man. Fr. 22164, ff. 79 and 101.

35 Journal, May 1767: 8.

36 “I intend, Gentlemen, to examine jointly with you whether the language you call vulgar, which has until now been used in the science of commerce, does indeed require the reforms you say you have made to it.” Journal, March 1767: 159. See also Journal, July 1767: 6. And concerning the physiocratic approach of political economy: “Economic science is still in its infancy in your nation, & already people are slipping into the spirit of system”, Journal, May 1767: 141. See also Journal, June 1767: 12: “It is a most singular thing, the enthusiasm people have for a system”.

37 Journal, August 1767: 57.

38 Journal, August 1767: 34, 35 (capitals in the original).

39 A single author (Forbonnais) is enough to stand for all the letters of the alphabet in the Journal, since the various authors called by letters in the Éphémérides all repeat the same discourse.

40 This was the Gournay circle's explicit position, as can be seen in the title of one of Forbonnais's books, Réflexions sur la nécessité de comprendre l’étude du commerce et des finances dans celle de la politique, Dresden, 1755.

41 Véron de Forbonnais, Recherches et considérations sur les finances de la France, Basle, Cramer, 1758. For Quesnay's two letters, see Quesnay (2005, 1173–1180).

42 On the importance of factual observation among the physiocrats, see Charles and Théré (2012) and Perrot (1978).

43 Gazette, 1764, n° 34 and 35.

44 Gazette, 1764, n° 71.

45 Gazette, 1764, n° 79.

46 Gazette, 1764, n° 94 and Du Pont (1764b).

47 Letter from Turgot to Du Pont, (Turgot 1765) and Bureau d’agriculture de Soissons (1765).

48 “Réponse du laboureur Franc-Comtois, à la Brochure de M. D.P. intitulée Lettres sur la différence qui se trouve entre la grande & la petite culture, &c.”, Journal, September 1765: 7–100. See also Letter from Turgot to Du Pont, 10 May 1765 (Turgot 1914, II, 438).

49 Gazette, 1764, n° 94. By the way, Forbonnais was indeed the owner of significant real estate, although not in Franche-Comté, but in Perche (West of Ile-de-France).

50 This attitude should also be linked to the absence of any officially backed authority producing undisputed statistics. Indeed, most of the statistics generated by the royal administrative machinery never reached the wider public; they were to be kept secret. This means that, by definition, any printed evaluation or calculation was suspect of being fanciful.

51 Quesnay (2005, 953); the original reference is as follows: Journal, November 1766.

52 Journal, July 1767: 6; see also Journal, March 1767: 159 and Gazette, n° 55 (11 July 1767): 540–541.

53 About the development of political myths, see Avezou (2001) who provided a detailed study on Sully.

54 For his criticism of Colbert, see Quesnay (2005, 174, 296, and 347); for his praise of Sully, see Quesnay (2005, 173, 183, and 407).

55 The most likely hypotheses concerning its identity are Plumard de Dangeul, who collaborated to the Journal and Abbot Yvon.

56 The various articles in the controversy are to be found in the 1766 issues of the Gazette: n° 32–35, 42–44, 51–64, 67–70. In the Journal, there were articles in the December 1766, February 1767, and April 1767 issues.

57 Journal, July 1767: 139.

58 Concerning the book's reception: see Anon (1850, 30–32).

59 Journal, July 1767: 147. This is, indeed, the position defended by the writers of the Gournay circle in the 1750s, of which Forbonnais was the most important.

60 Journal, July 1767: 139, 144, 149. On the topic of patriotism in the Gournay circle, see Skornicki (2011, 113–146).

61 Journal, July 1767: 144. On the importance of British references in the Gournay circle, see Charles (2008); Journal, July 1767: 148. On the significance of the idea that free trade cancel uncertainty for consumers in the Gournay circle, see Minard (1998, 265–270).

62 These phrases were used in the presentation of the new editorial line published in January 1767. The writers set themselves apart from the old editorial team by their refusal of “excessive enthusiasm” and promised “more reason than heat”, Journal, January 1767: 194.

63 Journal, August 1767: 71–72.

64 In the dictionaries of the period, Alpha meant by analogy the first of all.

65 Quesnay (2005, 1116). Our emphasis.

66 See, for instance, “Mémoires et observations sur la culture angloise” by Mr Guerrier senior, associate member of the Bureau d’agriculture of the généralité of Alençon, Journal, January 1767: 3–36.

67 The only exceptions we have found concern Quesnay (see Section 5) and a text by Mirabeau in which he calls himself a “wholesaler in Marseille” (“Lettre d’un commerçant de Marseille, à Messieurs les Journalistes de l’Agriculture & du commerce”, Journal, November 1766: 173–193.)