In this paper, which examines the business operations of the Anzin Mining Company during the Restoration, the record of a single firm has been used to assess recent interpretations of the nature of French entrepreneurship in the nineteenth century. These interpretations portray French industry in its formative period developing around “small units, small volume, and small horizons.” “Cautious management, obsolescent plants, and high profits” have been cited as main features which came to characterize the business operations of even the largest firms. It has been pointed out also that maximization of profits was not a fundamental aim of the French entrepreneur, nor did he indulge in the competitive business practices common to American industrial development. In France, security and continuity of the firm were as important to the entrepreneur as profits, and the acquired rights of the small or marginal firm were respected and preserved. The family character of most French enterprises has been emphasized in explanation of these phenomena. Close identification of family name and family honor widi business holdings prescribed a minimizing of risks in the family firm, as well as consideration for the welfare of other family enterprises. Finally, in order to allow these conditions to endure, French entrepreneurs favored a high protective tariff.

This article uses data on regional output and imports to examine the relationship between imports and regional growth in the Northeast. The tariff rates, both nominal and effective, are considered as evidence of national policy that may have benefited this particular region. The findings are that particular industries do benefit from tariff protection, but their location is due to regional resource advantages.

Historians frequently use values to explain behavior. Since their studies focus on the behavior, they have neglected to measure values and change in values. The current practices of historians of values will not yield conclusions usable in the history of behavior.

Between 1890 and 1950 the labor force of the United States creased by some 37.3 million workers. decade-by-decade States in-increments fluctuated widely, roughly half of the sixty-year increase (18.9 million) occurred over the first thirty years, and half (18.4 million) over the second.