bate, in the House of Commons, upon India affairs, into which had been introduced the circumstance of the Company's having failed in their engagement to pay half a million annually to the nation as the price of their monopoly, which monopoly costs the nation so much in troops, and in fleets. Whereupon Sir Theophilus Metcalfe (an East India Director, I believe), said, that "his chief motive in rising was, to shew, "that though the Company had not paid "the annual half million to the public, the public had derived other advantages from "the Company more than equal to it. "The duties," said he, " upon tea, at "the time that the charter was granted, "amounted to no more than 12 per centum; but, they have since been aug"mented to 95 per centum. The conclu"sion is, that, if the duties had remained at 12 per centum, the sum paid into the Exchequer, supposing the half million to "have been regularly paid, would have 86 been 5 millions; whereas, in the increased "duty upon tea imported by the East India "Company, the sum actually paid into the "Exchequer is .17 millions!"—Not a soul, in the Honourable House said a word in answer to this. It seemed to be acquiesced in, with a sort of sapient silence; at which I was so indignant, that I could not refrain from making the following remarks. upon it, in my next Number." Who is this gentleman? What is he? A logician, perchance; but certainly no politi"cian. In the first place, I would ask Sir "T. METCALF, in what part of the act of charter he will find the government "restricted as to the amount of duties to be "laid upon tea; but, does he really think, "that any human creature, not to say any "member of parliament, is so shallow, so owe about 7 millions of money, (to say "nothing about the addition to the nominal "sum caused by depreciation), and to whom "they are coming for more, instead of pay"ing what they owe; it is that same de"luded people, who, about twenty years ago, were, by the craft of the commercial "hypocrites and their abettors, induced to set up such a senseless bawling about "chartered rights," protected by "a "heaven-born minister;" it is this people "that have, as they richly deserved, been "compelled to pay the 17 millions in addi"tional duty upon tea."-This extract does, indeed, apply to that part only of the extract from Mr. Spence, which treats of the effect of duties levied upon tea; but, as to the other part, how often have I insisted, and proved, that the profits of the East India Company made no addition to the national wealth? How often have I shown, that the addition of wealth, arising from our Empire in the East," was an addition to the wealth of the Company and their ser vants, at the expence of the people of these kingdoms? How often have I shown, that the "fortunes brought from India," which some of the Nabobs represented to be an addition to the wealth and prosperity of the nation, were the result of an operation, half parliamentary and half commercial, which conveyed the amount of those fortunes from the land and labour of England into the pockets of East India adventurers, who came home, and with the very money which they had drawn from our land and our labour, obtained the estates of those who had paid away the value of them in taxes, and became the lords of the labourers, who had, substantially, been rendered slaves by the same operation? How often have I lamented, that the people of this kingdom, espe cially the land-owners, would not be convinced of these truths; and how provoked was I, in 1802, to hear them chuckle, be tween a laugh and a cry, when the shallowheaded Pitt asserted, that the overthrow of Tippoo Sultaun, and the consequent establishment of our power and extended commerce in the East Indies, had added more to our resources and our safety than all the conquests of France, than all her additional millions of subjects and acres of land, had added to her resources and her safety? In short, when have I missed an opportunity of promulgating opinions like these? I must, therefore, confess, that it is with some little displeasure, that I now see Mr. Spence giving them, and to the same public too, as something perfectly new, or, at least, never before conveyed to the British public in print. Mr. Spence, it is possible, has never read, or heard of, any of my remarks upon the wild wars of Pitt and Dundas for the preservation of India; upon colonial expeditions in general, and particularly upon the capture, re-capture, and unsuccessful attack upon, Buenos Ayres; upon the childish notion, that we should be all ruined, if the pa per-money were annihilated; upon, in short, first or last, every topic that he has touched upon relative to the importance of commerce. It is barely possible, that Mr. Spence has never read, or heard of any of these remarks; and, for two reasons, I hope he has not first, because he is not, in that case, chargeable with plagiarism; and, second, because the doctrine proceeding from two minds, between which there had been no communication, is, of itself, no bad argument in support of its soundness. Mr. Spence may, by bare possibility, never have read, or heard of, any of the numerous articles, in which, for the sake of illustration, I have laid money out of the question, and have supposed a state of society, wherein commodities of real value were bartered; any of the many, many essays, in which I have requested the reader to put money out of his mind, when he was talking, or thinking, upon the subject of national riches. It is possible, that Mr. Spence may never have seen, or heard of, this; but, I frankly confess, that I do not think it likely. It is uot the author that breaks out in me ho but the man of fair-dealing, who never, is sil his life, wittingly availed himself of tko ideas of another, whether friend or foe, without explicitly acknowledging it. But, let us now proceed to the hearing of MR. SPENCE upon the subject of export commerce. And, I must once more beg the reader, not only to go on slowly and attentively; but also to advance with a firm resolution to dismiss from his mind the prejudices there existing with regard to the importance of foreign trade. For, unless he can do this; unless he can say to himself, "I will listen to nothing but reason," he would do well to proceed no further. It has been very common for me to be answered, in questions relating to matters of political economy, with a, so, you would persuade us, that such and such is the case." My reply has been; yes, I would, indeed, fain persuade you so; and I am sorry to perceive, that you are pie-determined not to be so persuaded. if the reader be of the temper of these answerers, he would do well to lay down the Register; for, it is impossible for him to read to any profit. But, if, as I hope is the case with a vast majority of my readers, his mind be open to conviction, I am well persuaded, that it is now about to receive conviction of the truth of this important position: that this kingdom derives no addition of wealth from export commerce." We should "notwithstanding they draw a gross reve nue, an absolute creation of wealth an"nually, to the amount of £120,000,000 "from their soil: regard this true source of ❝ their wealth with indifference; with unac countable delusion fancy all their riches "have been derived from commerce; from as "value of the wine, rum, brandy, geneva, a source, the national profits of which "cannot be more than a twelfth part of "their whole revenue, and are miserable at "the idea of having a few ports shut against "their trade! And still more strange is the "consideration, that, not only their mer"chants, whose self-interest might blind "them on this point; not only their igno "rant vulgar have raised this cry of their 66 even their "dependence on commerce: "land owners, their statesmen, whom, of "all men, it behoved to have had right no"tions on such an important subject, have "re-echoed the senseless delusion. Well "might ARTHUR YOUNG indignantly ex"claim, on reading a speech of their favou"rite minister (Pitt), on the state of the "nation, in which agriculture was scarcely "deemed worthy of notice, as a source of "national wealth; "This the speech of a ""great minister at the close of the eight66 "eenth century!-No: it is a tissue of "the common places of a counting-house, ""spun for a spouting-club, by the clerk "" of a banker :-labour of the artisan industry of manufacturers-facility of ""credit-execution of orders-pre-emi"nence in foreign markets-capital compound interest-these are the great "illustrations of national felicity! This "" the reach of mind and depth of re"""search, to mark the talents framed to "govern kingdoms! These big words, to 66 66 paint little views, and splendid pe""riods, that clothe narrow ideas! These sweepings of Colbert's shop-These fr "gleanings from the poverty of Necker!" -If we comparatively, but in a slight degree, by "commerce; but we spend at least twice "the amount of what we gain, in luxuries "which deserve the name of wealth but "for an instant,-which are here to-day "and to-morrow are annihilated. How "then can our wealth be augmented by "such a trade? how will such a negative source of riches suffice to be referred to, as creating the immense positive wealth, "which we enjoy ?We are so much "accustomed to the error of considering "two things, that can be sold for the same 66 money, as equally valuable to the nation "which consumes them, because they are "equally valuable to the individual who "seils them; that we do not by any means "estimate with accuracy, the different "value of different kinds of wealth, in a "national point of view. Yet a case may "be imagined in which this difference "would be intelligible to every one. "Suppose, instead of indulging in the luxu"ries of tea, wine, and spirits, that it were "the fashion for every inhabitant of Bri "tain to inhale, once a year, a quart of the "aeriform fluid, called, by chemists, ni "trous oxyd ;-that this air was to be ob "tained only from France, and that the "price of it was one guirea a quart. ઃઃ Suppose also, that we paid for this " £10,000,000 worth of gas, by sending "woollen cloth to France to that amount, 66 Would importing in return, this invisible and "elastic wealth, in a proper contrivance of "bladders, casks, balloons, &c. "not an unprejudiced observer laugh at our "extravagant folly, if we should make a "clamour about the profit which the na“tion gained by this trade, because it took "off our woollen cloth to so large an "amount? Would he not justly say, 813] "These people are infatuated. Because "the individuals concerned in exporting "this woollen cloth, and in importing this gas, gain a few hundred thousand pounds profit, they fancy, that their nation gains by this trade, not considering, that "they are giving away ten millions of permanent wealth, which may last for years, "and might have been hoarded to an im"mense amount, for-what? for air; for 66 mere indulgence of a moment, which is "of no earthly benefit to its consumers, and "which in one day is expended, and ren"dered of no value whatever! They do "not see, that if they were without this 66 66 trade, and kept all their woollens, they "would be much richer than by exchanging them for such a fleeting substance; they do not perceive, that though their "merchants may draw to themselves a mil"lion per annum profit from this trade, "the nation loses by it ten millions per “annum."—If the considerations just "adduced serve to show the folly of the 66 opinion, which should conceive any na"tional wealth to accrue from such a ridi"culous traffic, as that alluded to; they "will equally prove the fallacy of the be"lief, that this nation gains great wealth by its commerce. For, though the tea, sugar, wine &c. for which we pay annually so many millions in more permanent wealth, are not of quite so volatile a nature, as an equal value of nitrous oxyd "would be; yet they are fully as unneces 66 66 sary for all the purposes of comfortable "existence, and when consumed leave no more traces of their having ever been. And, inasmuch as we pay for them, an amount much greater than the whole of any profit that we can possibly derive "from trade, it is clear, that it is from some other source that our wealth is "created.—* 66 * * * * * * If we would know who it is, that really get rich by British Commerce, we should inquire into the qualities as to premanency and necessity of the articles which we export, and compare them in these respects with the articles we import; and having made this comparison,, we shall "find, that it is Europe, Asia, America, "-all the countries with which she trades, --not Britain, that is enriched by her commerce. Thus, we supply the inhabitants " of America with clothes, with hardware, "with pottery; with a thousand articles of "the most pressing necessity, and of the greatest durability; and as we thus prevent the need of any great part of their pepulation being engaged in manufac [814 tures, nearly the whole of it can be employed in the infinitely richer source of wealth, agriculture. And what do we "receive in return for these benefits? Why, a vile weed, tobacco, which, doubt"less, when it has gratified our gustatory organs in its original form as tobacco, or has deliciously stimulated our olfactory nerves, in its pulverized and more refined form, snuff, has most marvellously added to our stores of national wealth! The 66 case is the same with all the other coun"tries with which we trade. We supply "them with commodities of absolute ne"cessity to comfortable existence, and we "receive in return from them such pre"cious articles as tea-which debilitates us, without affording an atom of nou"rishment: as wine, rum, brandy, which "do us the favour of shortening the days of a great proportion of our population. It "is the countries we trade with, and not sumers; and since, except they consumed "them no considerable export trade could "be carried on, it follows, that it is the "consumers at home, that actually are the means of creating all the stimulus which 66 66 improves and extends agriculture, whe- * "ther this stimulus arises from manufactures "sold at home, or exported. That this is "an accurate statement, will be still more "evident, if we consider, that at the very commencement of our commerce, and at every period since, the consumers of the foreign commodities imported, inasmuch as these commodities have never been the necessaries of life; have never been "food or raiment; might have consumed "to the same amount of home manufac"tures, and thus have directly supported the "manufacturers employed in fabricating "the articles destined for export. Just now, "for instance, if the consumers of the arti"cles, which we import and sell at home, "to the amount of fifty millions, were to "resolve no longer to consume them, is it "not self-evident, that if they chose, they "might take the place of our foreign cus ourselves up to degrading terror (as we do Dec. 6th, 1805. Vol. X. p £67. Of the consequences, which the subjugation of the continent by our enemy must naturally produce with respect to England, we have already, in the transactions at Hamburgh, seen a trifling specimen. Often, as the public can bear testimony, have I reminded the Balams of the city, that the soldier was abroad, and that, rail and curse and cry as much as they pleased, he would, I was afraid, before he sheathed the sword, have his share of the good things of this world. They may now, probably, begin to believe me; and, when they consider, that at the very moment when their goods were seized at Hamburgh, they were exulting in their triumph at Erentford, they will cer tainly excuse the people, over whom they triumphed, for being too much absorbed with their own chagrin to have time to break their hearts with sorrow for that seizure. For my own part, events of this sort do, I will freely confess, give me very little uneasiness; because I am persuaded, that, with respect to the ent interests of the kingdom, the seizure of mercantile property, already deposited in foreign states, can be productive of very little injury. I know well enough, that the merchants and the daily press will set up a most lamentable outcry upon this score; and they will accuse me of rejoicing, or, at least, of not weeping, at the success of the enemy; but, this will not deter me from expressing my opinion upon the subject; and, they cannot, in this instance, at any rate, accuse me of magnifying the power and success of that enemy. I will go a little further in this way, and say, that, were the French to succeed in seizing all the English goods and property in every port and place in Europe, and if they were to prevent such goods from being sent thither in future, I do not believe it would, even in the smallest degree, tend to disable England either for the defending of herself or for the annoying of her foes. That it would shut up a great number of commercial houses, I allow; that it would lower a great number of merchants and bankers; that it would diminish the means by which the Shaw's and the Mellishes have been put into parliament; that it would da much in this way I am ready to allow; but, I am by no means prepared to allow, that it would be injurious either to the liberties and happiness of the people, or to the permanent security and dignity of the throne. There is a strange perversity, which, upon matters of this sort, appears to have taken possession of men's minds. How are we to live, say they, if we cannot get rid of our manufactures?" They regard the nation in the light of an individual shop keeper; and then they run on reasoning upon all the consequences of a total loss of customers. But, they forget, that the individual shopkeeper must sell his goods in order to obtain food and raiment and money to pay for his goods, whereas the nation has nobody to pay for its goods, and can never receive an addition either to its food or its raiment for the sale of its goods. The fact is, that exports of every sort, generally speaking, only tend to enrich a few persons and to cause the labouring part of the people to live harder than they other wise would do. We have seen, that many other nations have arisen to the highest pitch of greatness without the exporting of a single article of merchaudize; and we bave, I think, a pretty satisfactory example, at this time, in the situation of France. Yet, our eyes are not opened. We are not, indeed, so stone blind as we were some few years ago, when, in answer to those who dwelt upon the dangers to be appre B |