sort of analysis[1] of the labours of Society and of the distribution of riches. I have put no algebra into it, and there is nothing of the Tableau économique[2] but the metaphysical part; moreover I have left a good many questions on one side which one would have to treat to make the work complete. But I have gone pretty thoroughly into what concerns the formation and the movement[3] of capitals, the interest of money &c . . .
7. Turgot to Du Pont, February 2, 1770.
. . . The passage about the original agricultural advances[4] has especially troubled me; you know how I have argued on this point with the abbé Baudeau in your presence. I may be wrong, but everybody likes to be himself and not somebody else. . . . These additions all tend to make me out an economist, which I don't wish to be any more than an encyclopædist.
8. Turgot to Du Pont, February 20, 1770.
. . . Although the advances which you call foncières contribute their share to the production of the crops,—as I should have said if my object had been to expound the principles of the Tableau économique, yet it is false that the
- ↑ Une espèce d'esquisse de l'analyse.
- ↑ [Quesnay's Tableau économique (1758) has been reproduced in facsimile for the British Economic Association, 1894. (New York: The Macmillan Co.)]
- ↑ La marche.
- ↑ L'endroit des avances foncières. [Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, Bk. iv, Ch. ix, translates dépenses foncières "ground expenses."]
