The conclusion is perfectly consistent.
It is, then, with Mr.Lestiboudois that we will argue, for how is it possible to do so with Mr.Gauthier?
If you say to the latter, the balance of trade is a mistake, he will answer, So I have declared it in my exordium.

If you exclaim, But it is a truth, he will say, Thus I have classed it in my conclusions.
Political economists may blame me for arguing with Mr.Lestiboudois.

To combat the balance of trade, is, they say, neither more nor less than to fight against a windmill.
But let us be on our guard.

The balance of trade is neither so old, nor so sick, nor so dead, as Mr.Gauthier is pleased to imagine; for all the legislature, Mr.Gauthier himself included, are associated by their votes with the theory of Mr.Lestiboudois.
However, not to fatigue the reader, I will not seek to investigate too closely this theory, but will content myself with subjecting it to the experience of facts.
It is constantly alleged in opposition to our principles, that they are good only in theory.

But, gentlemen, do you believe that merchants' books are good in practice?
It does appear to me that if there is any thing which can have a practical authority, when the object is to prove profit and loss, that this must be commercial accounts.