In this letter Hume had dropped a remark showing that he was still clinging to the idea which he had repeatedly mentioned to Smith of returning and making his home for the remainder of his days somewhere in France--in Paris, or "Toulouse, or Montauban, or some provincial town in the South of France, where"--to quote his words to Sir G.
Elliot--"I shall spend contentedly the rest of my life with more money, under a finer sky and in better company than I was born to enjoy." Of this idea Smith strongly disapproved. He thought that Hume would find himself too old to transplant, and that he was being carried away by the great kindness and flatteries he had received in Paris into entertaining a plan which could never promote his happiness, because, in the first place, it would probably prove fatal to work, and in the next, it would certainly deprive him of the support of those old and rooted friendships which could not be replaced by the incense of an hour. For his own part, and with a view to his own future, Smith was of an entirely opposite mind. The contrast between the two friends in natural character stands out very strongly here. Smith had enjoyed his stay in France almost as much as Hume, and had been welcomed everywhere by the best men and women in the country with high respect, but now that the term of his tutorship is approaching its end, he longs pa.s.sionately for home, feels that he has had his fill of travel, and says if he once gets among his old friends again, he will never wander more. This appears from a letter he wrote Millar, the bookseller, probably after his return from Compiegne, of which Millar sent the following extract to Hume: "Though I am very happy here, I long pa.s.sionately to rejoin my old friends, and if I had once got fairly to your side of the water, I think I should never cross it again. Recommend the same sober way of thinking to Hume. He is light-headed, tell him, when he talks of coming to spend the remainder of his days here or in France. Remember me to him most affectionately."[186]
His return, for which he was then looking with so much desire, came sooner than he antic.i.p.ated, and came, unfortunately, with a cloud. His younger pupil, the Hon. Hew Campbell Scott, was a.s.sa.s.sinated in the streets of Paris, on the 18th of October 1766, in his nineteenth year;[187] and immediately thereafter they set out for London, bringing the remains of Mr. Scott along with them, and accompanied by Lord George Lennox, Hume"s successor as Secretary of Legation. The London papers announce their arrival at Dover on the 1st of November.
The tutorship, which ended with this melancholy event, was always remembered with great satisfaction and grat.i.tude by the surviving pupil. "In October 1766," writes the Duke of Buccleugh to Dugald Stewart, "we returned to London, after having spent near three years together without the slightest disagreement or coolness, and, on my part, with every advantage that could be expected from the society of such a man. We continued to live in friendship till the hour of his death, and I shall always remain with the impression of having lost a friend whom I loved and respected, not only for his great talents, but for every private virtue."
Smith"s choice for this post of travelling tutor was thought in many quarters at the time to be a very strange choice. Shrewd old Dr.
Carlyle thought it so strange that he professes to be quite unable as a man of the world to understand Charles Townshend making it, except "for his own glory of having sent an eminent Scotch philosopher to travel with the Duke."[188] He thought Smith had too much "probity and benevolence" in his own soul to suspect ill in another or check it, and that a man who seemed too absent to make his own way about could hardly be expected to look efficiently after the goings of another.
"He was," says Carlyle, "the most absent man in company I ever knew,"
and "he appeared very unfit for the intercourse of the world as a travelling tutor."[189]
Still Townshend"s choice was thoroughly justified by the result, and Carlyle admits it, but thinks that was due less to the efficiency of the tutor than to the natural excellence of the pupil. And there is no doubt that Smith was exceptionally fortunate in his pupil. In his after life this Duke Henry took little part in politics, but he made himself singularly beloved among his countrymen by a long career filled with works of beneficence and patriotism, and brightened by that love of science which has for generations distinguished the house of Buccleuch. It may be true that with such a pupil Smith"s natural defects would find little opportunity of causing trouble, but it seems certain, as I have before said, that these defects were habitually exaggerated by Smith"s contemporaries, and Carlyle himself acknowledges that Smith"s travels with the Duke cured him considerably of his fits of abstraction. This is confirmed by Ramsay of Ochtertyre, who says that Smith grew smarter during his stay abroad, and lost much of the awkwardness of manner he previously exhibited.
Stewart is disposed to think, however, that the public have not the same reason to be satisfied with Smith"s acceptance of this tutorship as either he himself or his pupil had, and that the world at large has been seriously the loser for it, because "it interrupted that studious leisure for which nature seemed to have designed him, and in which alone he could have hoped to accomplish those literary projects which had flattered the ambition of his youthful genius." Now it is, of course, idle to speculate on the things that might have been. Kant was never forty miles from Konigsberg, and had Smith remained in Glasgow all his days there is no reason to doubt he could have produced works of lasting importance. But it is a truism to say that the works would have been other and different from what we have. To a political philosopher foreign travel is an immense advantage, and there never was a country where graver or more interesting problems, both economic and const.i.tutional, offered themselves for study than France in the latter half of last century, nor any political philosopher who enjoyed better opportunities than Smith of discussing such problems with the ablest and best-informed minds on the spot. Smith"s residence in France, whatever it was to his pupil, must have been an invaluable education to himself, supplying him day after day with constant materials for fresh comparison and thought. Samuel Rogers was greatly struck with the difference between Smith and the historian Robertson.
The conversation of Robertson, who, as we know, had never been out of his own country, was much more limited in its range of interest, but Smith"s was the rich conversation of a man who had seen and known a great deal of the world. It does not appear that Smith suffered in France from any such want of literary leisure as Stewart speaks of, for he began writing a book in Toulouse because he had so little else to do, and he had not attempted anything of the kind in Glasgow, so far as we know, for five years; but, at all events, for the wealth of ill.u.s.tration which his new book exhibits, the variety of its points of view, the copiousness of its data drawn from personal observation, the world is greatly indebted to the author"s residence abroad. And had Smith lived to finish his work on Government we should probably have had more results of his observation of France, but the _Wealth of Nations_ itself contains many.
M"Culloch has expressed astonishment that for all his long stay in France Smith should have never perceived any foreshadowings of the coming Revolution, such as were visible even to a pa.s.sing traveller like Smollett. But Smith was quite aware of all the gravities and possibilities of the situation, and occasionally gave expression to antic.i.p.ations of vital change. He formed possibly a less gloomy view of the actual condition of the French people than he would have heard uttered in Quesnay"s room at Versailles, because he always mentally compared the state of things he saw in France with the state of things he knew in Scotland, and though it was plain to him that France was not going forward so fast as Scotland, he thought the common opinion that it was going backward to be ill founded.[190] Then France was a much richer country, with a better soil and climate, and "better stocked," he says, "with all those things which it requires a long time to raise up and acc.u.mulate, such as great towns and convenient and well-built houses both in town and country."[191] In spite of these advantages, however, the common people in France were decidedly worse off than the common people of Scotland. The wages of labour were lower--the real wages--for the people evidently lived harder. Their dress and countenance showed it at once. "When you go from Scotland to England the difference which you may remark between the dress and countenance of the common people in the one country and in the other sufficiently indicates the difference in their condition. The contrast is still greater when you return from France." In England n.o.body was too poor to wear leather shoes; in Scotland even the lowest orders of men wore them, though the same orders of women still went about barefooted. But "in France they are necessaries neither to men nor to women; the lowest rank of both s.e.xes appearing there publicly, without any discredit, sometimes in wooden shoes and sometimes barefooted."[192] Another little circ.u.mstance struck him as a proof that the cla.s.ses immediately above the rank of labourer were worse off in France than they were here. The taste for dressing yew-trees into the shape of pyramids and obelisks by "that very clumsy instrument of sculpture" the gardener"s shears had gone out of fashion in this country, merely because it got too common, and was discarded by the rich and vain. The mult.i.tude of persons able to indulge the taste was sufficiently great to drive the custom out of fashion. In France, on the other hand, he found this custom still in good repute, "notwithstanding," he adds, "that inconstancy of fashion with which we sometimes reproach the natives of that country." The reason was that the number of people in that country able to indulge this taste was too few to deprive the custom of the requisite degree of rarity. "In France the condition of the inferior ranks of people is seldom so happy as it frequently is in England, and you will there seldom find even pyramids and obelisks of yew in the garden of a tallow-chandler.
Such ornaments, not having in that country been degraded by their vulgarity, have not yet been excluded from the gardens of princes and great lords."[193]
He discusses one great cause of the poorer condition of the French than of the English people. It was generally acknowledged, he says, that "the people of France was much more oppressed by taxation than the people of Great Britain"; and the oppression he found, by personal investigation, to be all due to bad taxes and bad methods of collecting them. The sum that reached the public treasury represented a much smaller burden per head of population than it did in this country. Smith calculated the public revenue of Great Britain to represent an a.s.sessment of about 25s. a head of population, and in 1765 and 1766, the years he was in France, according to the best, though, he admits, imperfect, accounts he could get of the matter, the whole sum pa.s.sed into the French treasury would only represent an a.s.sessment of 12s. 6d. per head of the French population.[194]
Taxation ought thus to be really lighter in France than in Great Britain, but it was made into a scourge by vicious modes of a.s.sessment and collection. Smith even suggested for France various moderate financial reforms, repealing some taxes, increasing others, making a third cla.s.s uniform over the kingdom, and abolishing the farming system; but though these reforms would be sufficient to restore prosperity to a country with the resources of France, he had no hope of it being possible to carry them against the active opposition of individuals interested in maintaining things as they were.
Smith was thus perfectly alive to the prevailing poverty and distress of the French population, to the oppression they suffered, to the extreme difficulty, the hopelessness even, of any improvement of their situation while the existing distribution of political forces continued, and was able to defeat all efforts at reform. Now from all this it was not very far to the idea of a political upheaval and a new distribution of political forces, and Smith saw tendencies abroad in that direction also. He told Professor Saint Fond in 1782 that the "Social Compact" would one day avenge Rousseau for all the persecutions he had suffered from the powers that were.
FOOTNOTES:
[159] _Hume MSS._, R.S.E. Partially published in Burton"s _Life_.
[160] _Correspondance Litteraire_, I. iv. 291.
[161] _Burton"s Letters of Eminent Persons to David Hume_, p. 238.
[162] Lady Minto, _Memoirs of Hugh Elliot_, p. 13.
[163] Morellet"s _Memoires_, i. 237.
[164] Sch.e.l.le, _Dupont de Nemours et les Physiocrates_, p. 159.
[165] _i.e._ the Royal Society of Edinburgh, to whom Stewart first read his _Life of Smith_.
[166] Stewart"s _Works_, v. 47.
[167] Clayden"s _Early Life of Samuel Rogers_, p. 95.
[168] _Theory of Moral Sentiments_, Part VI. sec. ii.
[169] Mackintosh, _Miscellaneous Works_, iii. 13.
[170] Brougham"s Men of Letters, ii. 226.
[171] Burton"s Hume, ii. 348.
[172] Garrick Correspondence, ii. 550.
[173] Garrick Correspondence, ii. 549.
[174] Ibid. ii. 501.
[175] Ibid. ii. 511.
[176] Stewart"s _Works,_ x. 49, 50.
[177] "Essay on the Imitative Arts," _Works_, v. 281.
[178] _Works_, v. 294.
[179] Say, _Cours Complet, OEuvres_, p. 870.
[180] Turgot"s _OEuvres_, v. 136.
[181] _Wealth of Nations_, Book IV. chap. ix.
[182] Memoirs of Madame du Hausset, p. 141.
[183] Marmontel"s Memoirs, English Translation, ii. 37.
[184] Fraser"s _Scotts of Buccleuch_, ii. 405.
[185] Burton"s _Life of Hume_, ii. 348.
[186] Hill"s _Letters of Hume_, p. 59. Original in R.S.E.
[187] _New Statistical Account of Scotland_, i. 490. (Account of Dalkeith by the late Dr. Norman Macleod, then minister of that parish, and Mr. Peter Steel, Rector of Dalkeith Grammar School.)
[188] _Autobiography_, p. 280.
[189] _Ibid._
[190] _Wealth of Nations_, Book I. chap. ix.
[191] _Ibid._, Book V. chap. ii. art. iii.
[192] _Wealth of Nations_, Book V. chap. ii. art. iv.
[193] "Essay on the Imitative Arts," _Works_, v. 260.
[194] _Wealth of Nations_, Book V. chap. ii. art. iv.