Jean-Baptiste Say (1767–1832) was not only one of the major economists of his period, but he remains, following Evert Schoorl’s expression, ‘alive after 200 years’ (Schoorl 2013: 166).1 Recognized as one of the founders of economic science, he left his name on the famous law of markets (known in French as Say’s law, ‘loi de Say’)2 which fueled the economic thought ‘during the past two centuries’ (Kates 2003: 8), and contemporary economists continue to adhere to his thinking.
Say’s contribution to the elaboration of economic thought is a combination of continuity and disruption in both time and space. In time, Say aligns himself with Adam Smith3 but distances himself from him on several points4 and he clearly distinguishes himself from his other predecessors, the physiocrats.5 In space, he participates in the construction of economic theory by maintaining close ties with his economic contemporaries, notably English,6 but also embarks on significant controversies with them.7
The object of this book is to allow English-speaking readers to understand better the way in which Say conceived political economy, by opening the way to the original texts in which the author completely exposes his thought. These texts have virtually been until now only available in the French language. Their translation allows those who do not have the opportunity to consult the original sources directly to access the writings in which Say explains at length what the field of study of political economy must be, the method it must use, the way in which it has progressively succeeded in constituting itself and the interest its study and the knowledge of its laws presents.8
Nearly thirty years passed between the publication of the first of these texts, in 1803, and the one to which he made the final alterations a few weeks before his death in 1832. Between these two dates, Say dedicated much time to reflecting upon political economy, writing about it and teaching it.
A life dedicated to political economy
It is well before 1803 that Say takes his first steps in political economy.9 He is still an adolescent when his father, a Genevan merchant who became a currency broker in Paris, sends him to perfect his education in England. The young Say ‘witnesses, in 1786, the effect the Treaty of Commerce with France had in England’ (Say 2003b: 61). It is also during his sojourn in England that an incident resulting from the implementation of a new tax brings him to begin a reflection of an economic nature:
One day I saw a couple of builders arrived in my home with bricks and mortar. I could see no repair to be made, but my room had two windows: Parliament, or rather the minister had just decreed a tax on doors and windows, and my landlord, having decided that one window was sufficient for our work and getting washed, he had the other bricked up. I then reflected that I would have one fewer advantage and that my bricked-up window would bring in nothing to the revenue office. This was perhaps the first of my reflections on political economy.
(Say 1890: 2)
Upon his return to France, he becomes the secretary of the financier Etienne Clavière, the future Minister of Finances. The latter has in his possession a copy of Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations, which Say consults with an interest which leads him to buy a copy of the fifth edition published in 1789.10
A few years later, Say takes part in the founding of La Décade philosophique, littéraire et politique11 to which he contributes for nearly six years as the editor-in-chief. His writings in this journal are about various topics on society12 and his first text on political economy seems to be that dated 9 May 1795 concerning the price of foodstuffs (Say 1795).
At the end of the revolutionary period, Say competes for a prize offered by the moral and political science class of the Institute13 by drafting a memoir aiming to answer the question: ‘what are the most appropriate institutions for founding the morals of a people?’14. When the commission charged with examining the memoirs renders its verdict on the 15 Nivôse in year VIII (5 January 1800), it decides not to reward any of the eight candidates. It nevertheless judges Say’s memoir as worthy of praise, and the latter decides to publish it under the title of Olbie15 (Say year VIII [1800]).16
This period which follows Bonaparte’s accession to power brings about many changes marking Say’s life. The Consulate establishes the foundations of Napoleonic power and Say becomes a member of the Tribunate, one of the four assemblies put in place by the new constitution.17 He immediately leaves his post at La Décade.18 At the Tribunate, where he remains for just over four years, he is particularly interested in economic questions and belongs to the finance section. His admission to the Tribunate interrupts his economic reflection so little that, as his son Horace19 later points out, he ‘almost immediately commences to write his Treatise on Political Economy’ (Say 1848: 194, n. 1).
The success of the work, released in 1803, arouses Bonaparte’s interest, the latter intending to benefit from it. That very summer, Say is invited to a dinner by the Head of State who offers him the chance to publish a new edition of the Treatise incorporating a justification of the measures taken by his government. The proposition, which assures a re-edition of the work, is accompanied by an annual remuneration of 40,000 francs (Say [1814] 2006, vol. 1: XIV, n. 12).20 Say ascribes too much importance to political economy to put his personal interest ahead his convictions. He refuses the proposition, which warrants his eviction from the Tribunate when it is partially renewed in 1804. In compensation, he is nominated Director of Indirect Taxes for the Allier department, a post where he could expect an annual revenue of 30,000 francs, twice his indemnity as a tribune. He refuses, and becomes involved in industry by opening a spinning mill in Auchy, a village situated in the north of the country.
The fall of Napoleon between 1814 and 1815 brings Say back to his economic writings, having experimented with the practical side of political economy as an entrepreneur. Various publications are added to the re-editions of the Treatise of which one, the Catechism of Political Economy,21 is destined to reach a greater public than the readers of the Treatise by offering a ‘familiar instruction designed to make common the main truths of political economy’ (Say 1826a: vj).22
In order to diffuse political economic knowledge, Say does not content himself with writing: he also gives courses. These commence, between 1815 and 1819, at the Athénée, a Parisian private educational institution. Say is then appointed professor at the Conservatoire des arts et métiers (Conservatory of Arts and Trades),23 a post he keeps until his death.24 This public institution, established in order to perfect industry, is already well-known to him, having been the first to follow the course opened in 1804 for cotton-spinning techniques, before embarking upon industrial activity. The mistrust of government towards political economy leads to the establishment of the title ‘chair of industrial economy’. But the term’s distinction is purely formal and Say does not hesitate, right from his very first speech before his audience, to define industrial economy as being merely political economy ‘for use by the people who devote themselves to the industrial professions’ (Say [1820] 1848: 136). And it is indeed at the first chair of political economy manifestly created for him at the prestigious Collège de France that he is nominated in 1831.25
Say’s involvement in the teaching of political economy goes hand in hand with the pursuit of his work in publication.26 His courses at the Conservatory constitute the subject matter of the Cours complet d’économie politique pratique (Complete Course in Practical Political Economy) published between 1828 and 1829.
In the long introductions that open the Treatise and the Complete Course, as in the opening discourses that act as a first session in the three institutions where he teaches, Say takes time to consider the utility of political economy and its scientific aspect.
The usefulness of political economy
Knowledge of political economy presents an interest both for individuals, who can thus conduct their affairs for the betterment of their interests, and for a country, whose wealth can increase without being a detriment to others. This interest in political economy was already apparent in 1800 in Olbie. The inhabitants of this society imagined by Say become happier thanks to an evolution of morals brought about by the improvement of the economic situation. Henceforth, it is a society where families live in ‘honest ease and in which excessive opulence is as rare as extreme poverty’ (Say year VIII [1800]: 23). Honourable behaviours are the result of:
a wise distribution of general riches, which itself can only be the fruit of a good system of political economy; an important science, the most important of all if morality and the happiness of men deserve to be considered as the most worthy object of their quest.
(Ibid.: 10)
Say can, therefore, affirm that the first book of morals should be ‘a good treatise on political economy’ (ibid.: xij). From that point, ‘whoever made an elementary Treatise on Political Economy, suitable for teaching in state schools, to be heard by the most junior civil servants, by people in the country and by artisans, would be the benefactor of his country’ (ibid.: 10–11, n. 1).
It is the role Say undertakes in publishing such a book three years later. In the ‘Preliminary discourse’ which serves as an introduction to the Treatise, he develops at length the benefits that knowledge of political economy is likely to procure.27 The stake is all the more significant since, in contrast to Olbie’s ideal society, the population of even the richest countries is far from having an honest ease:
If we consider that in the most prosperous countries… we can see everywhere the exhaustion of poverty alongside plump opulence, the forced labour of some compensating for the idleness of others, hovels and colonnades, the rags of poverty mixed with signs of wealth, in a word, the most useful abundance in the middle of the most urgent need, we can no longer consider superfluous the research carried out to find out the causes of these ills and the remedies they are liable to.
(Say 1803, vol. 1: xlij–xliij)
The improvement that the knowledge of political economy has on the fate of the population makes it a legitimate study. This knowledge can encourage prosperity. A country’s prosperity stems not from the action of the government but the way in which individuals look after their private affairs.28 It is, therefore, essential that they should benefit from economic knowledge to guide their action. The benefits procured by the understanding of political economy are not only limited to mere individuals:
As economic knowledge lightens the way for individuals, it also makes the government’s way easier. It assists it in two ways: first by training better educated subordinates, more capable of assist...
