¹ For economic conditions generally, see Sombart, Werner—, Die deutsche Volk.swirtschaft im neunzehnten Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1919)Google Scholar and Sartorius von Waltershausen, A., Deutsche Wirtschaftsgeschichte, 1815–1914 (Jena, 1923)Google Scholar; on German industrialization, Bénaerts, Pierre, Les origines de la grandc Industrie allemande (Paris, 1933Google Scholar); on the Zollverein, , Henderson, W. O., The Zollverein (London, 1939Google Scholar). Much basic research remains to be done on nineteenth-century German economic history.

² Max E. Fletcher, “French Foreign Trade, 1815–1914,” an unpublished seminar paper. Comparable figures for Germany in the same period are not available, but studies of another of my former students, Mr. John A. Radcliffe, indicate that the proportions were almost the reverse.

The latest study of this period in France, with numerous bibliographical indications, is Dunham, A. L., The Industrial Revolution in France, 1815–1848 (New York, 1955Google Scholar). But the remark of the previous note applies to France as well.

³ Cf. Bénaerts, Industrie allemande, pp. 334–39.

⁴ See my doctoral dissertation, French Foreign Investment, 1850–1880 (Chicago, 1952Google Scholar) available on microfilm from the University of Chicago Libraries. The gold franc, equivalent to approximately. 20 pre-1914 dollars, is used throughout this article as the basic currency unit.

⁵ The literature on diffusion is abundant. For a general introduction, see almost any good anthropology text: e.g., Kroeber, A. L., Anthropology (rev. ed.; New York, 1948).Google Scholar For a pertinent discussion and examples in the history of France and Europe, see Scoville, Warren C., “Minority Migrations and the Diffusion of Technology,” The Journal of Economic History, XI (1951), 347–60Google Scholar, and “The Huguenots and the Diffusion of Technology,” Journal of Political Economy, LX (1952), 294–311, 392–411Google Scholar. See also below, p. 313.

⁶ Economist, 28 June 1851, cited by Clapham, J. H., An Economic History of Modern Britain (3 vols.; London, 1926–1939), II, 20.Google Scholar

⁷ Bénaerts, Industrie allemande, pp. 363–65; Henderson, W. O., Britain and Industrial Europe, 1750–1870 (Liverpool, 1954), p. 142Google Scholar. Not only machinery was involved; it was said that the Alsatian Nicholas Koechlin was the largest taxpayer in the state of Baden in the 1820's on account of his textile mills there.

⁸ See my article, “Founding the Bank of Darmstadt,” Explorations in Entrepreneurial History, VIII (February 1956Google Scholar). On the Credit Mobilier, Plenge, J., Gründung und Geschichte des Crédit Mobilier (Leipzig, 1904Google Scholar); also my article, “The Crédit Mobilier and the Economic Development of Europe,” Journal of Political Economy, LXI (1953), 461–88Google Scholar, although it is in error with respect to the Bank of Darmstadt.

⁹ For example, in the 1840's the average annual consumption of copper was approximately 10,000 tons, of which only 100 tons was produced domestically. See Journal des chemins de fer [cited hereafter as JCF], VII (1848), 412.Google Scholar

¹⁰ For details on these and other companies mentioned in the text, see the Appendix at the end of the article.

¹¹ See below, pp. 292, 294–95.

¹² Suermondt was actually a descendant of Huguenots who settled in Holland. He was born in Utrecht in 1818, but migrated to Aachen while still a youth.

¹³ Contract between Marquis de Sassenay and the Societe Metallurgique de Stolberg, Aixla-Chapelle (Aachen), 30 December 1840, Hausarchiv, Sal. Oppenheim Jr. et Cie., Cologne (hereafter abbreviated as Opp. Hausarchiv). Permission to consult these and other documents in the invaluable archives of this bank was graciously given by Herr Alex von Frankenberg- Ludwigsdorf.

¹⁴ Ibid., Arts, io, n, and 16.

¹⁵ See Redlich, Fritz, “Jacques Laffitte and the Beginnings of Investment Banking in France,” Bulletin of the Business Historical Society, XXII (December 1948).Google Scholar

¹⁶ Opp. Hausarchiv, Société des Mines et Fonderies de Zinc de Stolberg, de Sassenay et Cie, Foundation Act and Statutes, Paris, 8 April 1841.

¹⁷ Minutes of the general assembly of stockholders, 14 November 1842, Opp. Hausarchiv.

¹⁸ Ibid., 6 May 1845.

¹⁹ Ibid., 15 May 1845.

²⁰ Ibid., 6 May 1845.

²¹ Ibid., 15 May 1845.

²² Statutes, Art. 31, Opp. Hausarchiv.

²³ Ibid., Art. 34.

²⁴ JCF, VIII (1849), 38, 422.Google Scholar

²⁵ Purchase contract, II August 1853, Opp. Hausarchiv. The Westphalian company was a Franco-Belgian enterprise; its chairman was Victor Simon, general manager of the Société dela Nouvelle Montagne.

²⁶ JCF, XII (1853), 647Google Scholar; XIII (1854), 346.

²⁷ It is probable that Koechlin and his associates owned stock in the Westphalian company before the merger. At any rate, he, Sassenay, and the entire board of directors were subsequently forced to resign from Stolberg and were even sued in a legal action, although nothing came of it. L'industrie (Paris), VII (1858), 319.Google Scholar

²⁸ Ibid., IV (1855), 262, 405.

²⁹ Ibid., IV (1855), 405, 525. Earlier, Bischoffsheim-Goldschmidt had advanced funds to tide the company over for a few months. (Contract of II November 1854, Opp. Hausarchiv.)

³⁰ A. de Rainneville, Vincent Cibiel, Abel Laurent, Charles Le Lasseur, and Léopold Lehon, all of Paris; Edouard de Roncy, Amiens; J. R. Bischoffsheim, Ernest Brugmann, and L. Dupré, Brussels; Charles von der Heydt, Elberfeld; Wilhelm Hamacher, Dortmund; G. Bergenthal, Wantein; and Nellesen, Th., Aachen. L'industrie, IV (1855), 525, 558Google Scholar; JCF, XIV (1855), 560.

³¹ JCF, XIV (1855), 464, 560.Google Scholar

³² L'industrie, IV (1855), 525, 814.Google Scholar

³³ Annula report, 26 May 1869, JCF, XVIII (1869), 451.Google Scholar

³⁴ Ibid., 19 May 1864.

³⁵ JCF, XXIX, 635 (8 October 1870).Google Scholar

³⁶ The legal seat of the company was in Liège, and some of the directors were Belgian; but in the 1840's and 1850's more than 85 per cent of the stock was held in France, and a majority of its directors also lived there. (Archives of Vieille Montagne [hereafter cited as VM], minutes of the annual meeting, 24 April 1843.) Special acknowledgments are due Monsieur J. Veillesse for his kindness in facilitating my research.

³⁷ Vieille Montagne (Oudenbergh) received its name in a concession dating from the fifteenth century. Before the nineteenth century the calamine ore was smelted jointly with copper to obtain brass, but it was impossible to obtain zinc itself, in isolation, until the Abbé Dony of Liège accidentally discovered a smelting process in 1809. Dony attempted to exploit his discovery commercially, but the problems of finding a market for the new metal were even greater than the technical ones of producing it. The concession was taken over in 1818 by Dominique Mosselman, one of Dony's partners, who had become wealthy as a contractor for Napoleon's armies, and after two decades of pioneering effort the industry was on the verge of commercial acceptance. In 1837 the Mosselman family, living in semiretirement in France, turned the concession and industrial equipment over to the newly created company headed by Mosselman's son-in-law, Count Charles Lehon, first Belgian ambassador in Paris.

For teccal information on the manufacture of zinc, see La Société de la Vieille-Montagne à l'Exposition universelle de 1889 (Paris, 1889Google Scholar), a brochure prepared for the Paris exposition of that year. For the industry generally, von Wiese, Leopold, Beiträge zur Geschichte der wirtschaftlichen Entwickfung der Rohzinkfabrikation (Frankfurt, 1902).Google Scholar

³⁸ Vieille-Montagne à l'Exposition universelle, p. 41.

³⁹ The establishment of the Second French Empire and its attendant glorification—in particular, the reconstruction of Paris and the proliferation of artistic output—must not be overlooked as a factor in the expansion of the demand for zinc. Cf. JCF, XIV (1855), 876.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ VM, annual report, 25 April 1854.

⁴¹ Ibid., 30 April 1870.

⁴² VM, Société des mines et usines à zinc de la Prusse rhénane, Statutes, 20 August 1852.

⁴³ Ibid., Art. 20.

⁴⁴ JCF, VI (1847), 884Google Scholar; VH (1848), 140; XI (1852), 944–45.

⁴⁵ VM, annual report, 25 April 1854.

⁴⁶ VM, annual meeting, 26 April 1855, procès-verbal. In 1954 the German properties of Vieille Montagne, organized since 1934 in the wholly owned subsidiary A. G. des Altenbergs für Bergbau-und Zinkhüttenbetrieb, produced 21,541 tons of crude zinc. Vieille Montagne's own production was 146,000 tons. Total production in western Europe was 744,000 tons. (VM, annual report, 28 May 1955.)

⁴⁷ Louis Courvoisier to Saint-Paul de Sinçay, Hamburg, 18 December 1852 (VM, Casier 29, Dossier 74). Courvoisier was resident partner in Hamburg of the Paris firm, Des Arts et Cie; he was a commissioner of Vieille Montagne and one of the organizers of the Silesian company.

⁴⁸ L'Industrie, III (1854), 622Google Scholar; Silesian Zinc Company, first annual report, 27 April 1854.

⁴⁹ Vieille Montagne, annual report, 25 April 1854; Crédit Mobilier, annual report, 29 April 1854.

⁵⁰ Annual report, 22 April 1855.

⁵¹ Ibid..

⁵² Ibid..

⁵³ Wiese, Geschichte der Rohzinkfabrikation, pp. 207–8.

⁵⁴ Bénaerts, Industrie allemande, p. 352.

⁵⁵ Contract of 28 January 1853, Opp. Hausarchiv.

⁵⁶ Statutes, 10 February 1853, Opp. Hausarchiv.

⁵⁷ Foundation Act, 10 February 1853, Opp. Hausarchiv.

⁵⁸ L'industrie, V (1856), 55, 141Google Scholar. The problem of determining nationality sometimes arises. Here and elsewhere I have used wherever possible an explicit statement of nationality in the original sources, or, lacking that, the legal residence of the individual. When other criteria have been relied upon, such as judgment from the name only, mention of this is made either in the text or notes.

⁵⁹ JCF, XIII (1854), 89, 118.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ JCF, VI (1847), 261.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Beck, Ludwig, Die Geschichte des Eisens in technischer und kulturgeschichtlicher Bezichung (5 vols.; Braunschweig, 1887–1903), IV, 696, 716.Google Scholar

⁶² Ibid., IV, 983, 995. In the same year France produced more iron in coke furnaces than was produced in all German states by all methods combined.

⁶³ Spethmann, Hans, Das Ruhrgebiet in Wechselspielen von Land und Leuten, Wirtschaft, Technik., und Politik (2 vols.; Berlin, 1933), II, 263, 284Google Scholar. It is possible that Detillieux himself was Belgian, not French. Spethmann refers only to “die kapitalkräftige französische Firma Charles Detillieux et Cie”; of the other authoritative writers, Beck (Geschichte des Eisens, IV, 983) calls him a “Belgian engineer,” whereas Bénaerts {Industrie allemande, p. 513) and Stillich, Oskar (Eisen und Stahlindustrie [Nationalökonomische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der grossindustriellen Unternehmung, Vol. I (Berlin, 1904)], p. 145Google Scholar) both state that he was French. Engerand, Fernand (Le fer sur une frontière; la politique métallurgique de I'Etat allemand [Paris, 1919], p. 32Google Scholar) refers to him as “Charles de Tillieux, un Français.”

⁶⁴ Bénaerts, Industrie allemande, p. 359. See also Johannsen, Otto, Geschichte des Eisens (Düsseldorf, 1925), p. 156Google Scholar, and Spethmann, Ruhrgebiet, II, 265. A few furnaces in the 1840's had employed a mixture of coke and charcoal as fuel. The Friederich Wilhelm works at Mülheim, which fired a furnace wholly with coke in 1850, is generally credited with being first in the Ruhr itself (the 1847 furnace was at Hochdahl, south of the Ruhr valley, but used Ruhr coke); but it depended upon the relatively scanty blackband ore found in Ruhr coal measures. Detillieux's ore came from the Siegerland.

⁶⁵ Notarial archives of Maître Emile Fould (1832–1880), Paris, “Dépôt par M. Ed. Blount et M. Charles Gosselin d'un acte concernant la Socété des Mines et Fonderies du Rhin,” 15 December 1852. (The Fould Notarial Archives are now located in the offices of Maître René Philippot, 60, rue de la Chaussée d'Antin, Paris. Acknowledgments are freely accorded to M. Philippot for permission to consult these archives, and to M. Meunier, his chief clerk, for facilitating my research.)

⁶⁶ Ibid.. Blount, an Englishman by birth but throughout his active life a Paris banker, was chairman of the company; Gosselin was vice-chairman. About 20 per cent of the capital was furnished by English friends and relations of Blount, the remainder by residents of Paris. The “committee of surveillance” included, in addition to Blount and Gosselin, J. F. Laveissière, Ch. L'Habitant, and Emile Rainbeaux of Paris, and John MacNamara of London.

⁶⁷ Beck, Geschichte des Eisens, IV, 983.

⁶⁸ JCF, XII (1853), 808.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Opp. Hausarchiv, Band 198.

⁷⁰ JCF, XII (1853), 919.Google Scholar

⁷¹ See above, p. 288.

⁷² Opp. Hausarchiv, contracts of 6 April and 29 April 1853. The decree of authorization for the company was dated 10 November 1852, to take effect 1 July 1853. The principal members of the syndicate, in addition to the Oppenheims and Koechlin, were F. Bartholony, chairman of the Paris-Orléans Railway, Count A. de Rainneville, a director of the same company, and Leroy de Chabrol et Cie, Paris bankers, but the syndicate also included J. Mirès, several directors of the Crédit Mobilier, and others.

⁷³ Opp. Hausarchiv, A. Koechlin to A. Oppenheim, Paris, 15 September 1853.

⁷⁴ JCF, XII (1853), 919–20.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Opp. Hausarchiv, A. Koechlin to S. Oppenheim, Paris, 23 December 1854.

⁷⁶ Fould Notarial Archives, minutes of the general assembly of the Société des Mines et Fonderies du Rhin, Paris, 10 February 1855.

⁷⁷ JCF, XIV (1855), 808.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Detillieux, Charles, “Bericht über den Betrieb und die Haushaltungsverwaltniss des Phönix,” Berg und hüttenmännische Zeitung, XV (1853), 425–29.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Spethmann, Ruhrgebiet, II, 266.

⁸⁰ Hocker, Nicolaus, Die Grossindustrie Rheinlands und Westfalens (Leipzig, 1867), p. 321.Google Scholar

⁸¹ The total output of Prussian blast furnaces, which includes some castings as well as pig iron, was 293,000 tons in 1855. See Annalen des deutschen Reichs, 1876, p. 1057.

⁸² Phoenix, annual report, 27 October 1857.

⁸³ Ibid.. For the Gelsenkirchen company, see below, p. 305.

⁸⁴ Stillich, Eisen-und Stahlindustrie, pp. 139–40.

⁸⁵ Opp. Hausarchiv, minutes of the directors' meeting, Paris, 30 September 1855.

⁸⁶ Detillieux, “Bericht über … Phönix,” Berg-und hüttenmännische Zeitung, XV (1856), 427.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Opp. Hausarchiv, minutes of the directors' meeting, 25 April 1855.

⁸⁸ Ibid., 19 May 1855.

⁸⁹ Ibid., 25 April 1855.

⁹⁰ Ibid., 19 May 1855.

⁹¹ Ibid., 25 August 1855.

⁹² Ibid.. Michiels was subject to a similar condition; he violated it in the same year and was thereupon dismissed.

⁹³ Ibid., 27 June 1855; JCF, XIV (1855), 808Google Scholar. On the Austrian State Railway, see my article, “The Crédit Mobilier and the Economic Development of Europe,” Journal of Political Economy, LXI (1953), 466.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Opp. Hausarchiv, minutes, 28 January 1856.

⁹⁵ Beck, Geschichte des Eisens, IV, 991.

⁹⁶ The shares of the Rhine company, with a nominal value of 3,500,000 francs, were exchanged against new shares with a par value of 5,006,250 francs; but the difference may have been accounted for by assets above the value of the nominal capital.

⁹⁷ Opp. Hausarchiv, minutes, 30 December 1855.

⁹⁸ Der Aktionär, 14 October 1855, quoted by Stillich, Eisen-und Stahlindustric, p. 142.

⁹⁹ lbid., pp. 143 f.

¹⁰⁰ Opp. Hausarchiv, Band 198.

¹⁰¹ Stillich, Eisen-und Stahlindustrie, pp. 146 f.

¹⁰² Ibid., pp. 143 f.

¹⁰³ Hocker, Grossindustrie Rheinlands und Westfalens, p. 341.

¹⁰⁴ Phoenix, annual report, 30 October 1855, cited by Stillich, Eisen-und Stahlindustric, P. 139.

¹⁰⁵ Spethmann, Ruhrgebiet, II, 359.

¹⁰⁶ Beck, Geschichte des Ėisens, V, 641.

¹⁰⁷ Bénaerts, Industrie allemande, pp. 350–53; Engerand, Le fer sur line frontière, p. 32; L'industrie, V (1856), 462Google Scholar; JCF, XXII (1863), 828Google Scholar; Monileur beige (Annexe), 13 June 1873, pp. 411–12. See Appendix for details.

¹⁰⁸ Stillich, Oskar, Steinkphlenindustrie (Nationalökonomische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der grossindustriellen Unternehmung, Vol. II; Leipzig, 1906), p. 203Google Scholar. Cf. Bénaerts, Industrie allemande, p. 353, and Henderson, Industrial Europe, p. 156 n.

¹⁰⁹ Stillich, Sleinkohlenindustric, p. 144.

¹¹⁰ Spethmann, Ruhrgebiet, II, 284; see above, pp. 296–97.

¹¹¹ Opp. Hausarchiv, Band 204.

¹¹² Stillich, Steinkohlenindustrie, pp. 147, 149.

¹¹³ The Schaffhausen'scher Bankverein, founded in 1848, was the first corporate bank in Germany, but it was not the model for the subsequent credit banks. See my article, “Founding the Bank of Darmstadt,” Explorations in Entrepreneurial History, VIII (February 1956), 113, 120.Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ Ibid., passim.

¹¹⁵ JCF, XV (1856), 162Google Scholar. See also the Economist, 4 October 1856: “Frenchmen have invested immense sums in the railways, banks, crédits mobiliers, and enterprises of all kinds which have been started in Germany since the peace.” The German banks were unable to obtain Bourse listings in Paris owing to a prohibition by the government on new authorizations in 1856.

¹¹⁶ JCF, XXIX (1870), 435Google Scholar; L'industrie, XIX (1870), 417–18Google Scholar; Alex von Frankenberg-Ludwigsdorff, “Abraham Freiherr von Oppenheim, (1804–1878),” Mitteilungsblatt der Industrie-und Handelskammer zu Köln, V (1950), 300.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Ibid., p. 299; Krüger, Alfred, Das kölner Bankiergewerbe vom Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts bis 1875 (Essen, 1925), p. 149.Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Ibid. The original list of stockholders included 48 Frenchmen of a total of 106 (Opp. Hausarchiv, register of stockholders).

¹¹⁹ See, e.g., Bénaerts, Industrie allemande, pp. 362–66, for a listing of some of the contributions made by Frenchmen to Germany's woolen, silk, and cotton industries.

¹²⁰ Opp. Hausarchiv, Sassenay to Oppenheim, Stolberg, 2 March 1846. Italics supplied.

¹²¹ JCF, XII (1853), 920–21; XVIII (1859), 593.Google Scholar

¹²² Annalen des deutschen Reichs, 1876, p. 1062; Ibid., 1877, p. 1055; Spethmann, Ruhrgebiet, II, 373.

¹²³ The “Rhine-Elbe” mines, from zero output in 1860, exceeded 350,000 tons in 1873; production in 1870 was probably close to 200,000 tons. The “Graf Beust” and “Carolus Magnus” mines, owned by Phoenix, had a combined output of 200,000 tons as early as 1858. Both the Silesian Zinc Company and Vieille Montagne had German coal mines producing about 50,000 tons each by 1870.

¹²⁴ Beck, Geschichte des Eisens, IV, 696; V, 254; Annalen des deutschen Reichs, 1876, p. 1062. The figure for Luxemburg must be subtracted from that of the Zollverein to get the German output.

¹²⁵ See above, p. 300.

¹²⁶ 8,029,000 tons for all of Germany in 1899, 303,382 for Phoenix in 1898/99 (fiscal year). The same proportion held in 1901/02. Cf. Stillich, Eisen-und Stahlindustrie, p. 179.

¹²⁷ Beck, Geschichte des Eisens, V, passim.

¹²⁸ Hocker, Grossindustrie Rheinlands und Westfalens, pp. 294, 411.

¹²⁹ Ibid., p. 411.

¹³⁰ Ibid., p. 417.

¹³¹ Ibid., p. 418. The proportion had been higher in earlier years.

¹³² Ibid., p. 414; Wiese, Geschichte dcr Rohzinkfabrikation, p. 192.

¹³³ Ibid. In 1888 French-controlled firms produced directly 50 per cent of the total European production of 271,000 tons of raw zinc, although France itself had a negligible proportion. Indirectly, the French controlled a still higher proportion. Cf. Vieille-Montagne à I'Exposition universelle, p. 47.

¹³⁴ Zinc and lead, 58,000,000; insurance and banking, 40,000,000; iron and steel, 20,000,000; coal, 19,000,000; glass, 10,000,000; copper, 3,000,000.

¹³⁵ The first machinery factory in Saxony was set up at Chemnitz by an Alsatian in 1857; a French company with a capital of 2,000,000 francs owned a slate quarry in Bavaria; although it was scarcely an industrial enterprise, the spa at Ems, from which issued the telegram that spelled the fate of the Second Empire, was leased to a French company capitalized at 3,000,000 francs.

¹³⁶ Annalen des deutschen Reichs, 1876, p. 892.

¹³⁷ For convenience, I include railways and banks with “industrial enterprises.”

¹³⁸ Annalen des deutschen Reichs, 1876, p. 892.

¹³⁹ Ibid., p. 640.

¹⁴⁰ Krüger, Kölner Bankiergewerbe, p. 20.

¹⁴¹ Camillo di Cavour, acting as a private citizen and as a director of the first chartered railway in Piedmont, was charged with obtaining the services of a chief engineer in 1850. Regarding the choice between French and English—in his opinion, there were no other alternatives—he wrote that “we preferred a French to an English engineer for the simple reason that the English are bourreaux d'argent [i.e., spendthrifts] and even at that we could not get a passable man except for an outrageous price.” Bert, A., ed., C. Cavour: Nouvelles lettres inédites (Turin, 1889), p. 387.Google Scholar

¹⁴² Bénaerts, Industrie allemande, p. 334, quoting P. Boissonade.

¹⁴³ Cameron, French Foreign Investment;, “The Crédit Mobilier,” JPE, LXI (1953), 461–88Google Scholar; “L'exportation des capitaux français,” Revue d'histoire économique et sociale, XXXIII (1955), No. 3.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁴ There are several discussions in the literature. See, e.g., Clough, S. B., “Retardative Factors in French Economic Development in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries,” The Journal of Economic History, VI (1946), Supplement, pp. 91–102Google Scholar, and David S. Landes, “French Entrepreneurship and Industrial Growth in the Nineteenth Century,” Ibid., IX (1949), 45–61.

¹⁴⁵ The Compagnie houillière de Graigola-Merthyr, established in 1875 with a capital of 7,000,000 francs. Its legal seat was in Paris, its three coal mines and a briquette factory in South Wales. (Bourse de Paris, Annuaire, 1880, pp. 992–93.)

¹⁴⁶ This was recognized as early as 1850 by a no less astute and well-informed observer than Cobden, Richard, who remarked that “as merchants the English are much superior to the French; but as manufacturers the French are quite our equals. If the French had the same natural advantages that we have, they would have done and could do all that we have.” Le monde des affaires de Louis-Philippe au plan Monnet (Paris, S.E.D.E., 1952), p. 20.Google Scholar