A trade model to promote Dutch welfare during a period of decline

Between 1771 and 1796, Dirk Hoola van Nooten (1747-1808) published translations of works written by Bonnet, Condillac, Montesquieu and Smith, while he also wrote several books on Dutch and natural law. In my thesis I argue that Van Nooten’s ideas should be seen in the context of an ongoing debate about Dutch foreign trade policy. As described by Koen Stapelbroek, a number of thinkers debated in the 1740’s and 1750’s about the question whether there still was a relation between ‘the flourishing of the linen industry in Haarlem and Leiden and the Dutch staplemarket’ and about the question whether this dynamic still prevailed in the modern ‘jealousy of trade’. Van Nooten’s translation of Condillac’s Le Commerce et le Gouvernment and his translation of Montesquieu’s De l’Esprit des lois conceptualised the problems of Dutch trade and manufacturing. Van Nooten explained the structure of the Dutch mercantile system and elaborated on its weaknesses, which were exploited by countries like France and England. Van Nooten thought that Dutch industry was essential for the Dutch mercantile system. Manufacturing offered an opportunity to transform raw materials into more valuable products, which could be exported to other countries. The government had to support this practice by enabling manufacturers to import raw materials as cheap as possible. Trade and manufacturing were both essential elements of the Dutch mercantile system. This strategy was threatened by England, which limited Dutch imports by its Navigation Acts. Van Nooten’s translation of The Wealth of Nations of 1796 should be seen in the context of his other proposals to reform the Dutch mercantile system. His earlier proposals highlighted the role of the government in promoting commerce, but his introduction in De Rijkdom der Volkeren was very critical about commercial policy of the state. He adopted Smith’s vision of the mutual benefits of international commerce, which implied that the Dutch Republic was not involved in a commercial war with France and England. Instead, the Republic could profit from the commercial success of its neighbours. This development should not be seen as an adoption of the idea of ‘free trade’, but as the adoption of an alternative ‘trade model’. Smith’s model had an important advantage. It did not require sophisticated commercial policy. The political decline of the Dutch had forced Van Nooten to reconsider his earlier opinions about commerce. The Fourth Anglo-Dutch War and the war with France during the 1790’s had made it clear to him that the Dutch were not able to compete with their neighbours. This failure would also imply that the Dutch government would no longer be able to support domestic commerce. Smith’s model offered a remedy to this problem, since his model did not require such support. It rejected such support as harmful. The state should only protect property, build infrastructure, and prevent the emergence of monopolies. The state only had to enforce the rules in order to facilitate economic competition.