Prohibitions of importation then appear to be unreasonable on the principle of the importance of preferving a balance of trade. But nothing can be more abfurd than this whole doctrine. A trade carried on naturally and regularly between two countries is always advantageous, though not equally fo, to both; for it increases the exchangeable value of the annual produce of land and labour, that is, the revenue of both. If the balance be even, and the trade confift altogether in the exchange of native commodities, both will be gainers, and nearly equally, for each country affording a market for the overplus of the other, each will replace the capital which had been employed in raifing this furplus, and had given revenue and maintenance to a certain number of its inhabitants. If the balance be even, and the trade on one fide with foreign goods, and the other with native commodities, the latter would gain more than the former, because the revenue arifing from the trade will be divided between two countries in one cafe, and remain in one country in the other. But whether the balance of trade be favourable to one country, or to another, the trade itself is beneficial to both. It is the intereft of merchants and manufacturers to fecure the monopoly of the home-market: but it is undoubtedly the intereft of the country to purchase goods of those who fell them cheapest, whether natives or foreigners. A rich nation may be a more formidable enemy, but will certainly be a better customer to a commercial nation, than a poor one. Nothing, therefore, can be more abfurd than to aim at impoverishing our neighbours in order to enrich ourselves. On the whole, the profperity, or decay of a nation does not depend upon the balance of trade, which may be againft it while it is increafing in real wealth, but upon the balance of produce and confumption. The fociety in which the exchangeable value of its annual produce exceeds that of its annual confumption is increafing its revenue, and is therefore in a profperous ftate, whatever may happen with respect to its coin.

The means employed for encouraging exportation have been drawbacks, bounties, treaties of commerce, and colonization.

Drawbacks, by which the merchant is allowed to draw back upon exportation, either the whole or a part of the duties impofed upon domestic industry, ferving not to overturn the balance which naturally takes place among the feveral employments of fociety, but to hinder. it from being overturned by the duty, are justifiable and useful. The fame may be faid of the drawbacks upon the re-exportation of foreign goods imported.

Bounties are only reasonable in thofe branches of trade which cannot be carried on without them. Their effect is,

to force the trade of the country into a channel much less advantageous than that in which it would run of its own accord. The bounty upon the exportation of corn, renders it fomewhat dearer in the home-market than it would otherwise be, and fomewhat cheaper in the foreign: the effect of which is, that, as the average money price of corn regulates more or lefs that of all other commodities, it lowers the value of filver at home, and raifes it a little abroad: hence it renders our manufactures fomewhat dearer, and difcourages them, without rendering any real fervice to the fariner, who has only a nominal benefit. Bounties on fuch articles of production and importation as are neceflary for defence, may be expedient. All the reftrictions of law to prevent or limit engroffing and forestalling, to reduce the price of corn, by fixing its utmost extent, to annihilate or confine the trade of the corn-merchant or dealer, to prohibit or difcourage either the importation or exportation of corn, or to prevent the trade of the merchant carrier of corn from one country to another, proceed upon falfe principles, and are injurious to the interests of the country.

Treaties of Commerce in favour of any particular country, giving it commercial privileges fuperior to other countries, though beneficial to the merchants and manufacturers of the privileged country, are neceffarily difadvantageous to the country which grants the favour, because a monopoly is eftablished against themselves, which muft generally raise the price of goods higher than where a free competition is permitted. Such a monopoly has fometimes been granted from an expectation that it would produce a balance of trade in favour of the country granting it, by encouraging the fale of its manufactures in the country thus diftinguifhed. This is the foundation of the treaty of 1703 between England and Portugal; which binds Portugal to receive English woollens, but not on better terms than thofe of other nations, and obliges Great Britain to admit the wines of Portugal at twothirds the duty of those of France, and is therefore difadvantageous to Great Britain. The importation of gold or filver from Portugal is of much lefs confequence than is commonly fuppofed; the greater part of it being re-exported in exchange for confumable goods, which might be purchafed with greater advantage, by a direct trade, with the produce of English induftry.

Colonies were established among the ancients from motives different from those which have directed their establishment in modern times. The colonies from the ftates of Greece were emigrations proceeding from the excefs of population. Thofe of the Romans were grants to the people to filence their com

plaints

plaints of the unequal diftribution of lands at home. The expectation of finding gold and filver mines, joined with that of discovering a north-west paffage to the Eaft Indies, occafioned the conqueft and fettlement of America.

The colony of a civilized nation, established in a waste country, or one in which the natives easily give way to the new fettlers, advances rapidly to wealth and greatnefs. Their knowledge of agriculture, their habits of fubordination, the great encouragement to induftry which the eafy purchase of land affords, and the extraordinary profits which will arife from the produce, notwithstanding the high price of labour, are circumftances which concur to hasten the progress of improvement and wealth. The American fettlements, befides thefe advantages, have had that of an eafy dependence on the mother country. The political inftitutions of the English colonies have been peculiarly favourable to the improvement and cultivation of land. Among them the engroffing of uncultivated land has been restrained; the right of primogeniture is not univerfal; the alienation of lands is easy; the taxes are moderate; and the market allowed for the fale of their overplus produce is more extenfive than that of any other colonies. All the different civil eftablishments in North-America, exclufive of Maryland and North-Carolina, of which no exact account has been got, before the prefent difturbances, did not coft the inhabitants above 64,700l. a year. It is only with regard to certain commodities that the British colonies are confined to the market of their mother. country. These are called enumerated commodities. Among the non-enumerated are included the important articles of grain, lumber, falt provifions, fish, sugar and rum. The enumerated goods are chiefly, molaffes, coffee, cocoa-nuts, tobacco, pimento, ginger, whale fins, raw filk, cotton wool, beaver, and other peltry of America, indigo, fuftic, and other dying woods, naval ftores, pig and bar iron, copper ore, pot and pearl ashes. In every thing, except their foreign trade, the liberty of the English colonists to manage their own affairs their own way is complete. From the nature of their affemblies and government, there is more equality among them, than among the inhabitants of the mother country. It muft, however, be acknowledged, concerning the British, as well as other colonies, that the mother country has had little merit either in projecting or effectuating their establishment, and that the monopoly in trade has tended to retard the progrefs of the colonies, and has been only fomewhat lefs illi beral and oppreffive than that of other European nations over their colonies.

The general advantages which Europe has derived from the difcovery and colonization of America, confift in the increase of its enjoyments, and the augmentation of its industry. Both these effects are much restricted by the exclufive trade of the mother countries. Each colonizing country derives peculiar advantages from its colonies by means of its exclufive trade, increasing both its enjoyments and induftry: but these advantages are only relative with refpect to other nations; and to obtain them, both abfolute and relative difadvantages are incurred in almost every other branch of trade. The English monopoly hath been continually drawing capital from all other trades to be employed in that of the colonies, and confequently hath injured other branches of trade to encourage this: it hath also kept up the rate of profit in all the different branches of trade, higher than it would naturally have been. By leffening the competition, it increased the profits in the colony trade; and by leffening the competition in other branches, it raised the profits of thefe likewife. Now an advance of profit, requires an advance of price, which is unfavourable to trade, and enables other countries to underfell that which labours under this disadvantage. The monopoly of the colony trade has also been injurious, by forcing the foreign trade from neighbouring countries, from which returns being frequent, a greater quantity of labour may be employed, to countries more remote, which not admitting of frequent returns, muft in this view be lefs advantageous; and by forcing fome part of the capital of Great Britain from a direct foreign trade of confumption to a round-about one: this must be the cafe with respect to fuch enumerated goods as are imported in greater quantities than are neceffary for home confumption. Another inconvenience arifing from the monopoly is, that it has turned the ftream of British induftry too much into one channel, and deftroyed the natural balance which would otherwife have taken place among its different branches. The natural effects of the colony trade are, however, fo beneficial, that they have greatly overbalanced all the bad effects of the monopoly. By raifing the rate of mercantile profit, the monopoly difcourages the improvement of land; and encourages fuperAluous expence among the merchants.

Notwithstanding the great and obvious difadvantages of this monopoly, the maintenance of it has been the principal end of the dominion which Great Britain affumes over her colonies. The whole expence of defending and preferving the colonies, is therefore in reality a bounty to fecure a pernicious monopoly. A peaceable feparation would establish a free commercial intercourfe, more beneficial than the monopoly. In order to render the provinces, in a state of dependence, advantageous to the empire, it ought to fupport its own peace eftablishment,

blishment, and contribute its proportion to the general expences of government. It is not probable that this fhould be obtained from the colony-affemblies. It has therefore been proposed, that the colonies fhould be taxed by requifition; the fum to be specified by the British parliament, and the provincial affemblies to be at liberty to raise it in their own way. If this contribution were to be regulated by the land tax, parliament could not tax the colonies without taxing its own conftituents, and they might be confidered as virtually reprefented. The members of the Congrefs and their dependents, are elevated to fuch a degree of confequence, that no method seems more likely to engage them to a voluntary fubmiffion, than giving the leading men of each colony an opportunity of continuing and increafing their confequence, by allowing each colony which fhould detach itself from the general confederacy, a number of reprefentatives in the British parliament proportioned to its contribution to the public revenue.

The establishment of exclufive companies is another species of pernicious monopoly. In poor countries this monopoly attracts towards the trade thus limited more stock than would otherwise go to it in rich countries it prevents the employment of fo much stock in it as might otherwife be expected: in both it is injurious. Nor are fuch companies neceffary: for when a nation is fufficiently rich, fome merchants would naturally turn their capital towards the different branches of the trade thus monopolized, as foon as it fhould be laid

open.

Having thus confidered at large the fyftem of commerce, we are now briefly to take notice of that of agriculture.

Mr. Colbert, the famous minifter of Louis XIVth, adopted the mercantile fyftem fo far as to lay great difcouragements upon agriculture. In oppofition to his fyftem, the French philofophers propofed one which reprefented agriculture as the only real fource of wealth. The cultivaters of ground, because their labours afford a neat produce to the landlord after paying completely all the neceflary expences of cultivation, are called the productive clafs. Artificers, manufacturers, and merchants, replacing only the ftock which en ploys them, together with its ordinary profits, are faid to be unproductive. Thefe are maintained wholly at the expence of the proprietors and cultivators of lands: but it is their intereft to encourage them, because it enables them to purchase the produce of labour much more advantageoufly than they could otherwife have done, and thus raifes the value of the furplus produce of the land. The capital error of this fyftem, of which Mr. Quefnai was the author, confifted in reprefenting the clafs of manufacturers and merchants as unproductive; for this ciafs re

2

produces