394
Elboeitf to Rouen . —A defert.
M. i’Abbe Raynal remitted 1200 livres to the Royal Society of Agriculture at Paris ,to be given as a prize on the fubject of the following queftion, Une agriculture florifanteinflue-telle plus fur la profperite des manufactures, que la’croiffemcnt des manufactures furla profperite , de /’ agriculture ? How the writers, who contended for the prize, will de-cide the queftion, I fhall not inquire ; but the faCts, which I have here noted, feem toweigh materially towards enabling us to examine it. I take France to have pofiefled,from 1650 to 1750, the molt flourifhing manufactures in Europe : they were fo con-fiderable. and fome of them remain yet fo important, as to enable us to appeal merelyto faCts for an anfwer to fuch a queftion, fo far as the example of that kingdom is con-cerned. That century of profperous fabrics, what did it effect for agriculture I mayvery fecurely reply, nothing. Whatever accounts I received of the comparifon betweenthe former and the prefent ftate of their cultivation, were in favour of the latter; yet,fuppofmg it as good in 1750 as at prefent, I hefitate not to albert, that if fuch immenfefabrics, encouraged almoit exclufively for a century, could create ho better hufbandrythan I met with in France, , we may very fafely conclude, that manufactures may flourifhgreatly, without fhedding much influence in favour of agriculture. Such is the con-clufion which forces itfelf upon one from the general view of the kingdom ; but let usexamine it more in detail. Thegreatefl fabrics in France are the cottons and woollensof Normandie, the woollens of Picardy and Champagne, the linens of Bretagne , andthe filks and hardware of the Lyonois. Now, if manufactures be the true encourage-ment of agriculture, the vicinity of thofe great fabrics ought to be the beft cultivateddiftriCts in the kingdom. I have vifited all thofe manufactures, and remarked the at-tendant culture, which is unexceptionably fo execrable, that one would be much moreinclined to think there was fomething peftiferous to agriculture in the neighbourhoodof a manufacture, than to look up to it as a mean of encouragement. Confidering thefertility of the foil, which is great, Picardy and Normandie are among the worft culti-vated countries I have feen. The immenfe fabrics of Abbeville and Amiens have notcaufed the inclofure of a fingle field, or the banifhment of fallows from a fingle acre.Go from Elbceuf to Rouen , if you would view a defert : and the Pays de Caux, pof-fefling one of the richeft foils in the world, with manufactures in every hut and cottage,prefents one continued fcene of weeds, filth, and beggary ; a foil fo villainoufly mana-ged, that if it were not of an inexhauftible fertility, it would long ago have been utterlyruined. The agriculture of Champagne is miferable, even to a proverb; I faw theregreat and flourifhing manufactures, and cultivation in ruins around them. Let us pafsinto Bretagne , which affords but one fpeCtacle, that of a dreary, defolate wafte ; darkas ling —fombre as broom can make it. You find yourfelf in the midft of one of thegreateft linen manufactures in Europe , and, throwing your eye around the country, canfcarcely believe the inhabitants are fed by agriculture; if they fubfifted by the chace ofwild animals, their country might be as well cultivated. From hence crofs the king-dom to Lyons ; all the world knows the immenfe fabrics found there ; and thofe of St.Etienne among the moft flourilhing in the kingdom: De toutes les provinces de France ,fays M. Roland de la Platiere, le Lyonois eft le plus miferable *. What I faw of it gaveme little reafon to queftion the aflertion. The remark of another French writer makesthe experiment double: L’Artois eft un de provinces les plus riches du royaume. C'eft
un verite inconteftable—elle ne poffede point de manufactures f. I will not prefume to af-
* Journal Fhyfique, tom. xxxvi, p. 342.
f Memoire fur cette queftion, Eft-il utile en Artois du divifer les femes, par M. Delegor.gue, 1786. p. 23.
i fert,