13 Dec.r 1801

Maximum

1

The example of France has been referred to as an experimental proof of the

ineligibility /inexpediency/ of a maximum law. The reference to be applicable to

the purpose must go to this, that the example proves the inexpediency of such a

law according to any the most advantageous form that could in the country be

given to it. But to this purpose the example will be found inapplicable

altogether. To those who are unable /want either ability or inclination/ to look

beyond a name the argument may be a sufficient one: but to any one who will take

the trouble of seeing what was really done in France by government on the

occasion referred to by that name /word/ the resemblance will be found wanting

altogether. In France, the price was set at random and set abundantly too low:

it was accompanied with an obligation – an universal pell-mell observation – to

carry the corn to market to be sold at that inadequate price: and the price

which would have been inadequate had it even been real was after all but

nominal, payment being to be taken in worthless paper. This account of the

matter is taken from the /an/ interesting narrative, purporting to be that of a

Lady, who was witness to the scene. The propositions it does prove are abundant

– that people ought neither to be plundered nor put to death nor plundered

without