Methinks upon viewing the picture I have drawn, it is easy now to
conceive, why, as I have observed in page 62, _a person, however strongly
convinced of the cruel effect which ought naturally to arise from a
debt of 64 millions sterling, contracted from 1754 to 1762, could not
nevertheless cite in ~England~, from 1763 to 1775, a single indication
of a decay in agriculture or commerce, nor any falling-off in the
enjoyment of luxury, public or private, nor less insolence in the bulk
of the people_. The reason is this: the two capitalists, who failed not
to increase the price of every thing they were concerned in, according
to the exigency of the taxes, determined also (_after a few little
formalities, always necessary with regard to the people, when nothing but
luxury has been taxed_) to augment the price of labour in proportion to
that of its products; foreigners, on the other hand, raised the price of
their goods in proportion as taxes had increased the goods of _England_
exported to them; and the old equilibrium was restored every where, as
soon as the general increase of prices had made the general power of
consumption, equal to the need the State was in of an exterior as well as
an interior, _i. e._ of a foreign as well as a national consumption, in
order that all the taxes might be productive.
But if the debt of 64 millions, contracted from 1754 to 1762, had
increased, by 10 _per cent._ the nominal value of all merchandise
exported from _England_ since that period, how shall we prevent the 60
millions of the last debt, from increasing, from 8 to 10 _per cent._ the
nominal value of all commodities to be exported after this later period?
And if the general augmentation of prices, which has clearly followed the
debt contracted in _England_ from 1754 to 1762, has proved advantageous
to all _Europe_, without hurting _England_, why should not the general
increase of prices, which results, and will inevitably result from the
last _English_ debt, prove unprejudicial to _England_, although it will
prove advantageous to all _Europe_?
But if this increase of 10 _per cent._ generally acknowledged, in the
price of all merchandise in _Europe_, had extended only to the products
of industry; if the price of the total of the produce of agriculture had
not increased in the same proportion;—_had not Nature always silently
and successfully opposed all the dreams of speculation on this head,
to what a degree of misery and wretchedness would not agriculture have
been reduced in all parts of our so much enlightened ~Europe~!_—It was
not so.[10]
The quantity of wheat sold at _Berne_ at 69 _batz_, on a medium of five
years taken from 1751 to 1755, was sold for 92⅗ _batz_ from 1766 to 1770.
The quantity of wheat sold at _Dijon_ at the lowest, 2_l._ 11_s._ 5_d._
on a medium of 5 years from 1753 to 1757, was sold at the lowest, 4_l._
5_s._ 9_d._ on a medium of 5 years from 1766 to 1770.
The quantity of wheat sold at _Bâle_ for 9_l._ 9_s._ on a medium of 5
years from 1754 to 1758, was sold for 13_l._ 14_s._ 2_d._ on a medium of
5 years from 1766 to 1770.
The quantity of wheat sold at _Geneva_ for 27 _florins_, on a medium of
5 years from 1751 to 1755, was sold for 37 _florins_, on a medium of 5
years from 1766 to 1770, (see _Arthur Young_’s Political Arithmetic.)
We find upon the total, from 1755 to 1770, as I observed in my
_Reflexions on a singular revolution in France_, about 40 _per cent._
increase in the price of wheat.—Ten _per cent._ was enough to discharge,
without expence to any body, and without any attention being paid to it,
the interest of the debt contracted in _England_, from 1755 to 1762; but
30 _per cent._ more was necessary, in order to come (without injuring
_England_) nearly to an equality with the _English_ price, a price
advantageous to the agriculture of all _Europe_; an advantageous price,
which the _barriers_ and barricadoes set up in _France_, had till then
prevented from extending to _Switzerland_.
The barriers having been removed, _Switzerland_ and _France_ must
necessarily have been enriched, or _England_ ruined:—_France_ and
_Switzerland_ were better pleased to be enriched; and so it will
necessarily happen after the removal of the barriers subsisting between
_England_ and _Ireland_, that the agriculture of the latter must be
enriched;—unless she should choose to do herself a real prejudice by
keeping to all her former low prices, in order to procure an imaginary
advantage to _Irish_ industry, in hopes of prejudicing the _British_
manufacturer;—which would indeed be very strange.
But if this proportionate augmentation in the price of every thing,—as
evident as it is necessary,—as general as it is useful,—as natural as
it is little suspected,—in consequence of a national debt contracted
by a country trading with all _Europe_,—getting rich by trading with
all _Europe_,—and who cannot get rich without sharing her wealth with
all _Europe_,—be also a complete demonstration of the burden being
NULL, so soon as the little private interests have rendered it general,
and no longer permit the supposition of its being productive of any
other bad effects, but such as necessarily result from a bad system of
taxation; does the point lie in rectifying the system, or in effecting
a reimbursement?—At least, is a tax to be levied for the purpose of
reimbursing, before we have searched deep into THE QUESTION THE MOST
INTERESTING TO SOCIETY THAT EVER WAS PROPOUNDED?
And in the supposition, that it should result from the examination, as
it does from my ideas, _that there neither is, nor can be any real and
lasting harm in the taxes, but that which is the consequence of a bad
system of taxation_; as there is however so much more harm done, at least
of a transient nature, as there are more taxes imposed, even in the
best manner,—would it not be necessary to conclude, that loans bearing
annuities, esteemed the most advantageous to the State, (although they
always require an heavier, and sometimes a double taxation), might have
proved the most pernicious and worst devised, _in any other circumstance
but that of a total discredit_, if they did not now furnish the Sovereign
with the means of redressing what is most oppressive in the old taxes,
without imposing new ones?
_On Luxury._
_I can sum up all that I have said hitherto, by transcribing a couple
of pages out of a pamphlet written in ~America~ in the year 1774, laid
before the Academy of Sciences in 1778, and printed at Paris in 1781.
I should certainly be excusable had I no other motive in this respect,
than to prove that my opinions are neither suggested by, nor depending on
circumstances. The reflexion contained in the following quotation from
that pamphlet, on the war that broke out in 1779, is but a survey of the
new order of things, which would not have presented itself to my mind,
had it not been in my power, even then, to have published in several
large volumes, that which I now comprise within three hundred and some
pages, in order to render its perusal less laborious to the reader._
“All the mystery of society, consists in establishing, without
the knowledge, and to the greatest advantage of the parties
concerned, the most equal, the most exact, and the most
equitable division that possibly can be made, between the land
proprietors, who are in possession of all, and the _pilferers_
who are in possession of nothing.
“This division operates of itself, by shackling, as little as
possible, the natural passions of the one, and the factitious
passions of the others, that is to say, by obstructing, as
little as possible, communications of all kinds.
“This division is inseparable from the greatest possible
quantity of productions and consumptions, which cannot be
effected but by the greatest number of _productors_ and
consumers, who will always be found and attracted where the
laws shall be as little prohibitory as possible.
“A prohibitory law in one country, may be, should be,
and no doubt will be, instantly followed by ten others,
in ten different countries, which will soon enforce the
_re-establishment of the equilibrium dictated by Nature, the
only one that deserves to be attended to, and the only one that
must prevail at last_.
“To the present war, _a war of revolution if ever there was
one_, will probably succeed the only useful and necessary
war that can be waged between nations enlightened by the
longest and most melancholy experience; a war essential to the
happiness of mankind, since the only contest left for decision
will be, who shall prove the most able to devise, or the most
ready to adopt, those laws that are calculated to procure _the
greatest possible consumption_, on which depends _the highest
degree of public revenue_:—
“Discussions these, important at all times, dangerous for
every one a few years ago, unbecoming perhaps in a private
individual at a time when the true politicians of _Europe_ will
find themselves compelled to make them the object of their
most serious meditations;—discussions, in fine, entirely out
of the way of a cultivator, who could not, without a palpable
folly, suffer himself to be led into them by the examination
of his blade of grass, and of a principle too evident to be
contested.” (_Essai sur la culture de la canne à sucre._)
_When a man has shewn himself capable of looking upon a war as the
readiest means that could conduce to a general union of interests,
no one will be surprised if that very man should allow to luxury the
principal honour in the accomplishment of such a prophecy. Nor would
any one be surprised if he were to add, that the rage for luxury, in
a discerning despot, would soon lead him to establish within his
dominions the greatest freedom, from which alone he can expect the
greatest display of all kinds of luxury, the choice and first fruits
of which would be always at his command. Nor again would any one be
surprised were the prophet to add, that wherever luxury should be at its
summit, none but the idle would be at a loss for a livelihood, and that
not a mean one; that even the idiot, as well as the worn-out labourer,
would find there, under the designation of a ~hospital~, an asylum equal
to the habitation of a King:—The habitation of the Kings of Great Britain
is not comparable to some of her hospitals._
Would not the question about luxury, reduced to its elements, like those
other questions which I have touched upon hitherto, present consequences
diametrically opposite to those ideas which perhaps are yet too common,
only because they have not been thoroughly examined? Methinks I have
advanced one step towards the solution of the problem, by proving (if I
have proved it) that the tax laid on that pretended monster, Luxury, is
in fact the most oppressive for the people, on account of the following
effects, from which the impost cannot be freed.
First, If that tax lessens the consumption of the article taxed,
provision must be made, by a fresh tax, for the _deficit_ in the first,
which nevertheless has already deprived of sustenance, those who derived
it only from that article of consumption annihilated by the tax.
Secondly, If the rage for the article taxed, gets the better of the
rigour of the tax, or in other words, of the absurd disproportion thereby
established between the real and nominal value of that article, the land
proprietor has no other resource left, whereby to provide for the tax,
and for the rest of his standing expences, than to raise the prices of
his commodities accordingly; and the poor, whose consumption has not been
taxed, pays dearer, nevertheless, for his bread, and for all that he
consumes besides, whilst the tax laid on luxury alone, is pleaded by all
the _capitalists_ as a pretence for not increasing the price of labour
amongst the people they employ.
Thirdly, If the little private calculations, of which I have spoken, did
not rectify (as I contend they do by degrees, and as they ought to do
sooner) the mistakes of the grand calculations in the administration of
finances; that is to say, if the land proprietor did not increase the
price of his commodities, in proportion as the tax bears heavy on that
article of luxury which he still persists to consume: it would appear
still more heinous in the eyes of the moralist; for those artificers who,
without remorse, without a blush, should employ themselves in the work
of _Satan_, of which the consumption should continue the same, would
subsist undisturbed in peace and plenty on that very work, whilst a
considerable number of scrupulous artisans, employed hitherto on articles
free from censure, but of which the consumption should have decreased by
the counter-blow of the taxes on luxury, would most scandalously be left
starving and unemployed.
I shall now inspect the question more minutely; for all I have said
hitherto is not so much an apology for luxury, as an exposition of the
inconveniences attending its being made the principal object of taxation:
I beg to be excused, if I grow unwillingly more familiar in my style,
when the dignity of the subject seems to require one of suitable dignity
in the manner of treating it.
It is the quality of the land that determines the division of its
products: however ungrateful the soil, the man who cultivates it, first
deducts what is necessary for his subsistence, and a trifle more; the
rest is divided amongst the landlord and some others, for one reason
or another admitted to a share. This division, determined by the most
general quality of the land, brings down the proprietor, who farms out
his estate, to about one third of its productions, and reduces nearly to
the like proportion, those who are employed in wresting them from the
bottom of the earth.
In order therefore to consume as much as 80 men, the proprietor must
have a landed estate capable of giving food to 240; and out of these
240, 160 must be provided for before the proprietor can think on his
own consumption. Consequently, it would be unreasonable to call him to
any other account than for that portion which he has received: but I
readily subscribe to the necessity of having that account examined with
the utmost rigour, since the object is to justify the dissipation of so
considerable a surplus, and since the employment of that surplus, well
ascertained, will give us sufficient light on the employment of the other
parts of the revenue, which by that means it will be useless to examine.
The highest pitch of extravagance, in point of luxury, is, beyond
contradiction, that which, in the smallest possible compass, contains the
largest quantity, as well as the greatest perfection of labour, and of a
labour the most easy to destroy.
Let us suppose a man who, to the fancy of being possessed of such an
article, should join that of seeing constantly at work all those hands
which must be employed to complete it; such a fancy never produces any
other effect, but that of tertiating or doubling the price of things. The
Patriarchs of old, busied and amused themselves, no doubt, in setting to
work those whom they enabled to eat; they lived too near the time when
man was condemned to labour, to maintain them in idleness. The modern
Patriarch of whom I am speaking, provided with a pound weight of flax,
which costs him 6_d._ divides it among 25 working people, who give it
every preparation necessary to answer the purpose it is intended for.
After an entire month of the most slavish precautions, the most minute
details, a thread, hardly perceptible to the naked eye, presents to the
warm imagination of the proprietor, the idea of the _chef-d’œuvre_ of
which this thread is to be the foundation; after 4 or 5 months more,
devoted to the most patient and assiduous industry, he is at last put in
possession of some slips of lace, weighing in all 4 or 5 drachms, picked
out and sorted, thanks to the last refinement of art, from that pound
of flax which had cost six-pence. Five-pence three farthings, and a few
fractions, are then, it seems, in the strictest calculation, the only
real loss—the only devastation which is occasioned by luxury carried to
the highest pitch of extravagance; and this loss is compensated by some
very curious pieces of workmanship, which it is impossible to value at
less than 227_l._ 10_s._ being the amount of 4550 days work at 12_d._
paid to each of the 25 working people, who have owed their subsistence,
for six months, to that pretended inutility.—Amongst all the passions
with which Providence has been pleased to gratify the rich for the
advantage of the poor, name me only one that occasions less devastation,
and maintains a greater number of indigent persons, than luxury carried
to excess. O ye rigid men, who have left off wearing lace, join with me
who have left it off too,—join with me in teaching those who continue to
wear it, how many of their brethren they nourish without knowing it! Make
them virtuous by teaching them, that in order to be so, they need only
do, from a sentiment of humanity, what hitherto perhaps they have done
through a motive of puerile vanity, or from a principle of ostentation,
which, when considered, needs to be considered with some indulgence.
Another aspect, whimsical enough perhaps, but by no means foreign to the
title of this pamphlet, would be that under which we should view those
prodigies of art and patience, as the work not only of 25 artificers
who were busied upon it for six months, but also of 12 or 15 husbandmen
whose existence and labour were indispensable for the sustenance,
during the same time, of the 25 labouring people employed in that great
work.... A peevish man would perhaps exclaim, _Was it indeed worth while
to be born, if all ends with this life?_—And yet, even in this case,
thread-lace ought not to be proscribed: it was not worth while indeed to
come into the world, solely to make lace; but, once born, we must work
at something, in order to bear, without weariness, every instant even of
a life which should not require lace-making for its support: as to the
nature of the work, let us not find fault with that of others, before we
justly estimate our own.... Can we find many of our fellow-creatures,
who on their death-bed are able to shew the work of their whole life ...
worth the smallest shred of lace then in being?
After this single instance of luxury, by which 25 men are fed during six
months at the expence of another, by daily reducing his revenue from
80 to 55, I think that, without being an enthusiast or a declaimer, it
would be difficult, even for a good man in the right sense of the word,
to withstand the pleasure (although perhaps rather of the mischievous
kind) of observing that little more is wanted beyond two such fancies
as we have stated, to bring the Proprietor, reduced in the origin from
240 shillings to 80, and then from 80 to 55—to bring him, I say, exactly
to the level of the cultivator, whom he has brought down to 9_d._
or 10_d._ and of the mechanic on whom he has bestowed 11 or 12_d._;
however, I am willing to allow him 24 for his real, personal, and daily
consumption. Twenty-four pence! will it be said, _What signifies being
so rich, to consume so little_! Yes, twenty-four pence; and this is
by much too much, if we deduct, as we ought, from the price of each
article supposed to be consumed by the rich, the sum that remains in
the hands of the pilferers of all kinds, who stand, unknown to him,
between him and that article.—_How! what say you then to that plate of
green-peas which costs 6, 8, or 10 guineas!_—But, my good friend the
consumer of green peas, if you knew how many pilferers it conceals, of
whom you have not the least idea! if you knew how many wants it has
supplied to some, how many indulgences of luxury it has procured to
others, before it found its way to the table of an Epicure, or of an
ostentatious man!—Let us try to enumerate them: workers of mines and
quarries, masons, carpenters, glaziers, colliers, lock-smiths, _English_
and _French_ sailors for the common-spice trade; _Dutch_ seamen, for the
more precious kinds; ships of war of the three Powers, indispensable for
the protection of the merchantmen employed on those objects; wood-fellers
in _Sweden_, sail-cloth weavers in _Russia_, ship-builders, pilots,
admirals of the three nations, husbandmen busied in the four parts of
the world in procuring food for themselves, in order to prepare food
for all those wood-fellers, glaziers, admirals, &c. exclusive of the
_Dutch_ gardener, and the _French_ cook who alone can worthily crown
the mighty operation.—Imagination loses itself in that single plate of
green peas. How many reductions from 16 pence to 8, and from 8 to 4,
have been required to produce it! It is inconceivable that it should
not sell for more than 6 or 8 guineas;—but if each of those pilferers
above mentioned takes back the small portion by which he has increased
the intrinsic value of the article.... O ye, who must have swallowed up
500 _properties_, in order to eat, without being guilty of extravagance,
that plate of green peas, and who flatter yourselves with the idea
of having consumed on that day fifty or sixty crowns worth, learn and
reflect henceforward, without remorse and without vanity, that you have
not spent above half one penny, the real value of any other dish of
greens which you might have substituted to the peas you have consumed.
Scrutinise, in the same manner, your wearing apparel; choose, like a
child, what pleases most the eyes of the body; or, like a fastuous man,
all that is most imposing to the eyes of the imagination; or, miser-like,
that which costs least money; or, in fine, like a man of sense, what
your means or your taste incline you to wear; the difference, as to
essentials, is little or none. It cannot be positively asserted, that
your consumption will be more or less considerable in one than in the
other case; but recollect that thread lace, for which you could not pay
less than 227_l._ 10_s._ because there stand between you and the pound of
flax from which it has been extracted, 35 or 40 intermediate pilferers,
to be fed during six months;—this lace, however, in spite of that
extravagant price, could not, as you have seen, be set down to account
amongst the articles of your real and personal consumption, for more than
sixpence, supposed to be the intrinsic value of a pound weight of flax,
which has gone through so many hands to be converted into lace. Now, on
this principle, you might be wrapped in lace from head to foot: and your
entire _mummy_, instead of presenting to the eye of a sworn appraiser
a consumption of 30 or 40,000_l._ would in this instant of its highest
splendor, only present him with a devastation of 200_lb._ of flax,
sacrificed to decorate that mummy, or to hide its defects.—And as the
object would be 200_lb._ of flax, the value of which is fully known by
the number of people to whom it would afford support, instead of dealing
so lightly as I did with a single pound, when I introduced my Patriarch,
the appraiser would reckon with you rigorously; he would consider, that
in the hands of the Arts, no part of the works of the creation can be
lost; that, as it is their triumph, so it is their duty, to divide into
10, 20, or 30 parts, whatever requires such a division, in order that
each may receive the degree of utility of which it is susceptible, and
which the Arts are bound to account for to society: the appraiser would
then carry you to the lace-merchant, in order to lay before you ten
different sorts of an inferior lace, taken from parts chosen successively
after that which serves you for a wrapper, and descending still from
pilfery to pilfery, he would at last inveigle you into the cabins of
some pretended wretch, where he would shew you the quantity of coarse
and substantial shirts, necessary to teach you that 3 or 4 _lb._ of
flax, at the most, are the only possible devaluations your mummy can be
reproached with, as two shillings are the only expence your vanity can
boast of in the 25 or 30,000_l._ which you could presume to have consumed.
Yet, let us grant something to the pretended importance of being
possessed of 500 _properties_, each of them sufficient to the support
of one man. I shall accordingly suppose you to be habitually cloathed
in those stuffs, which, to the richness of the materials that compose
them, join the perfection of workmanship, (which concerns you, as you
have seen, in no other light, but that of either a benevolent, or an
unintentional provider for the necessary consumption of the labouring
man);—but 10 _lb._ of silk, as they come out of Nature’s hands, are not
worth 30 shillings:—without enquiring why they may then be valued at 30
shillings, bring all the other parts of your dress to the touchstone I
have furnished you with; consider, that if you wear the same coat every
day, it would be far from being worn out at the end of the year,—and
how far it would be of course from standing for two or three pence
in the account of your daily consumption;—add thereto your real and
personal wastings in coals, wood, pomatum, essences, elixirs, &c. _valued
after the same principle_;—at what a distance you still remain from
the 24 pence I have granted you for consumption!—And do not say that
you renew your coat every season;—had you swallowed up 5000 instead of
500 _properties_, and should you change cloaths every day, your real
consumption would not be the greater for it: would not your _valet
de chambre_, to whom you should have given that suit of cloaths, for
which you had paid 40 guineas, and which you had worn only once—would
not, I say, your _valet de chambre_ sell it for 15 guineas to an old
cloaths-man, who would get 20_l._ for it from a strolling player?—Be
pleased now to trace that suit from _Paris_ to _Lisle_, to _Brussels_,
_Dresden_, _Poland_, _Russia_; see how many people will get a livelihood
by carrying it about; how many guineas it will bring to the travelling
_Roscius_, who will shine in so many countries at your expence; reflect,
on the revolutions which the elegance of that dress will occasion in
the modes at _Petersburgh_; how many draughtsmen, embroiderers, working
people of all sorts, will be employed and fed, (_thanks to your luxury_),
in copying that master-piece of taste and fancy.—This is not all; you
might probably, at the end of 15 years, meet again in _Paris_ with the
same suit, cut into small pieces, in the hands of some ladies of the
first rank, busily engaged in unweaving the rags, to send, as soon as
possible, those precious relics of your seemingly spoiled cloaths, to
_Lyons_, &c. where ten workmen are waiting its arrival, to get bread by
restoring to it a great part of its former value, under another form.—And
you would presume to have consumed it?... The work of God is not so
easily destroyed, nor his beneficence so easily concentered.
_Was it worth being so rich, to consume so little?_
Were you to say, _Is it worth while to commit an injustice in order to
grow rich, when we can consume but so little, and when the means are so
numerous of pilfering so lawfully all that is wanted for consumption?_
I could then understand you;—but since you are in possession of 500
_properties_ without having been guilty of injustice, it is something to
reflect that they are really to you, the source of numberless enjoyments
which you have it in your power to render worthy of a rational being:
and, as the continuance of those enjoyments depends entirely on the
health and bodily strength of so many others who are to contribute
thereto, it is something to be conscious that we find our own pleasures
in the interest of others; it is something to reflect, that these
pleasures are a very gentle mean, devised most probably by an universal
_Watchfulness_, to induce you to provide men destitute of every thing,
with that _modicum_ of goods which was not granted to them, and which,
nevertheless, being necessary for their sustenance, is sufficient to
their moderation, and prevents their feeling the privation of all the
rest: it is something to reflect, that you feed in fact 50, 100, 500
perhaps of your brethren, amongst whom there are 10, 15, 30, as well
fed as yourself, since they live on what comes from your table. As to
the others, whose faces you will never see, since some of them are at
_Pekin_, in _Arabia_, at _Constantinople_, and others in _France_,
_Russia_, &c. be assured that, with much less meat than you, but more
bread, potatoes, or rice, and a few glasses of an acid liquor, the idea
of which, whilst I venture to speak of it, is enough to crisp all your
nerves, they are as contented, as happy as you, because they consume,
without any reflection, without any solicitude for the morrow, all they
want, in order to view that morrow with the same tranquillity.—Would it
not be unjust in that Being, _who weigheth the mountains in a balance_,
if there were, amongst men, one condition more unfortunate than another?
Would he not be unjust, if amongst men, there were one condition more
blessed than another? I suppose, indeed, that there exists a Being,
_who weigheth the mountains in a balance_, as others have supposed that
there is a future life, where happiness is more visibly equal; and I
have hitherto ventured upon so many suppositions!—yet I would beg leave
to offer one more, relating though indirectly perhaps to the object
now under consideration; but this shall be the last: I will ask (upon
the supposition that there really exists a Being, not only Estimator,
Moderator, but Creator also of all that thinks, wishes, and can be
happy) ... yes, I presume to ask, whether the created being, capable of
conceiving the idea of giving immortality to the creature capable of
wishing for it, of fostering the hopes, and feeling the value of it,
would not be greater than the Creator himself, if the Creator had not
conceived such an idea?—I freely confess, that I should think myself
better than the Creator, had the Creator conceived such an idea without
putting it in execution.
I now return to the point which requires no kind of supposition, I
mean the real consumption.—Let us pass from that very insignificant
possessor of 500 _properties_, to the greatest Monarch upon earth.—What
difference is there between his consumption and that of the meanest of
his subjects?—He has the choice of every thing, such is the _ne plus
ultra_ of his power: three, four, or five pounds weight of nourishing
food, are really as sufficient for the one as they are necessary to the
other;—and on all points, what is the object that procures to the Monarch
either advantage or pleasure, the price of which as paid by him, _were it
even of fourfold the value_, is not exactly composed, both of the amount
of the sustenance that was necessary to the production of that object,
and of a sum which will infallibly pay for other productions, which must
be purchased to forward new ones—_from which the people will constantly
have deducted their necessaries, before they are permitted to satisfy the
superfluities, the luxury of any whosoever_?—Such is that never-ending
screw, that adorable chain, which nothing can stop or break, unless it be
the insanity of a monster, who should receive that fourfold price, and
bury it under ground, lest it should prove useful to society.—That wretch
was very consistent with his feelings, who wished the _Roman_ people
to have but one head, that he might exterminate the whole nation at a
single blow; but the phœnix will ever rise from its ashes; and Humanity,
with all her resources, all her rights, would be reproduced from the very
stones, were it possible that not a single head should escape the sword
of that _consistent being_ who might wish to cut them all off.
_Thoughts on the Colonies._
The question concerning luxury leads to the investigation of some ideas
on the Colonies; I do not mean that of taxing them, either in a direct or
indirect manner, for the reason truly specious, that the wars undertaken
for their protection, having loaded the nation with taxes to an enormous
amount, it is but just that they should come in for a share of the burden.
It has been observed, that a national debt contracted, no matter for
what, occasioning in every thing an indispensable increase of price, the
Colonies pay their quota of such a debt (notwithstanding the drawbacks)
when they purchase goods at the rate to which the said debt has advanced
them: it must also have been noticed, even how necessary it was that the
price of commodities from the Colonies should increase in proportion
to the price of those of the Mother-country, in order that the former
might be able to answer that advance of prices, without hurting the two
essential points, consumption and re-production; whence it follows,
that if new taxes are introduced, _either directly or indirectly_, to
defray their pretended proportion in the interest of the national debt,
neither harm nor good will result, _if the price of their commodities be
increased in the same proportion_; but that if they be taxed, without
that increase in the price of their commodities, they will consume by
so much less of national goods _or of foreign ones paid for in national
merchandise_, that is, to the amount of the sum which the tax shall have
taken from them: this point is evident. Thus it is, that after the war
in 1755, all _Europe_ was obliged, as has been shewn, to increase her
prices, so as to put them on a level with those in _England_; and had not
_Great Britain_ submitted to that reciprocal advance, and all the rest of
_Europe_ condescended to receive only, for the 13 _effective_ millions of
their own goods, the 13 _nominal_ millions of that quantity of _English_
commodities which was worth 14, on account of the taxes only, the nominal
million which would have remained in the hands of _England_, would have
been without value, _and no longer reproduced for want of consumption,
for want of means to pay for it, and to encourage such a reproduction_.
I think also that it is useless to examine whether the colonies can add
any thing to the real power of a nation, since, in order to be convinced
of the very reverse, it is enough to observe, that if 2 or 300 ships
mounting from 10 to 120 guns be required, in order to protect effectually
an extent of between 1500 and 2000 leagues of _colonial_ coasts, distant
1000, 1500, nay 4000 leagues from the mother-country, the 100,000
men employed in time of war, on those floating citadels, are always
furnished by the Metropolis, and do not in any manner exempt her either
from erecting those permanent citadels which must be scattered along
the coasts of the mother-country, or from providing the number of men
necessary to defend them in case of an invasion. In this point of view,
the colonies would therefore rather diminish than increase the national
power.
On the other hand, experience has just taught us, that as soon as those
very colonies, for which it is pretended so much blood has been spilt,
and so much money wasted, are in a situation to stand up in their own
defence, there is no depending upon them, but inasmuch as they are on
the footing of allies; and interest alone fixes the duration of every
alliance.
The above three objects deserve not, methinks, any further dissertation:
the question that merits a more particular scrutiny, is that which
concerns the utility of those very colonies, when their weakness is a
pledge of their fidelity.
That utility consists in securing to the mother-country, 1st, an
exclusive mart for such goods as she thinks proper to export there; and
2dly, the exclusive sale of the returns, in which, it is said, she finds
a compensation for the expence she is at to carry her goods to that
market.
I shall investigate, under various points of view, all relative to those
two objects, the utility of those colonies whose commerce is fully
ascertained, before I speak of any other; and I shall only draw the
necessary inferences from the most incontrovertible facts.
_1st._
We find in the Statements of Sir _Charles Whitworth_, that the exports
from _England_ to the colonies, whose independence can no longer be
disputed, amounted annually, upon a medium of 5 years, taken from 1769 to
1773, to the sum of 2,491,230_l._
Now the two wars of 1739 and 1755, undertaken, it is said, for
the protection of those colonies, that is, _to preserve_ to the
mother-country _the monopoly of them_, have cost _Great Britain_
99,141,625_l._; and these 99 millions, though the interest has been
reduced as often as possible, still cost _England_ annually 3,500,000_l._
It is then a sum of 3,500,000_l._ which, even so early as the year 1762,
_England_ had resolved to pay annually, in order to preserve, and the
better to secure to herself the exclusive privilege of exporting annually
to _North-America_, _European_ goods to the amount of 2,491,230_l._
_2dly._
The imports from those colonies into _Great Britain_, upon a medium
of the said 5 years, did not exceed the sum of 1,208,665_l._—_Great
Britain_, therefore, has enjoyed during the space of 5 years, a pretended
balance of 1,282,565_l._ against those colonies;—but is that glorious
balance any thing more than the advantage of having given to those
colonies, in the space of 5 years, a credit in the sum of 6,412,825_l._
supposing that such sum was the amount of her claims in that part of
_America_, or of the half, if in fact half only of that sum remained
due to her, notwithstanding the enormous appearance in Sir _Charles
Whitworth_’s Statements?
_3dly._
If the colonies, now independent, will henceforth call in all the other
nations of _Europe_ to a share in the advantage of crediting them in the
same manner, can it be supposed that _England_ will not find in _Europe_,
some other nation willing to receive that part of the _English_ credit,
which the independent colonies shall no longer think proper to make
use of? In this case, can any thing more be required, on the part of
_England_, than to manufacture in less quantity such goods as suit only
the inhabitants of _America_, and somewhat more of those that may suit
the different nations of _Europe_; and to this first operation to add the
complaisance of receiving a greater quantity of their goods than she has
imported hitherto?—In this case likewise, what ruinous consequences could
_England_ experience by exporting her goods to her neighbours, instead
of sending them to _America_?
_4thly._
If the complaints set up by _England_ against the United States, are
grounded only on their incapacity of making returns proportionate to the
value of the goods exported there since the peace, are the United States
to blame if _European_ cupidity has exported to _America_, in the space
of six months, as much as its inhabitants could consume and pay for in
two years? Does such an event, almost infallibly the result of a long
interruption of correspondence, prove any thing more than the necessity
of a balance between production and consumption, the advantage of knowing
as soon as possible the difference from the one to the other, the
inconvenience of a trade, in which we lose sight of our capital for whole
years together, and the advantage of a trade which would 5 or 6 months
after return to the hands of the _capitalist_ the stock he had laid out?
_5thly._
Had even those colonies remained in, or returned to a state of subjection
to _England_, would not the same interruption of correspondence have been
productive of the same inconvenience?—During the war, which terminated
by the treaty of _Aix-la-Chapelle_, all the _French_ colonies had
remained under the dominion of _France_, and yet during all the first,
and great part of the second year of peace most of the _French_ goods
were sold at _Martinique_ and _St. Domingo_, 15 and 20 _per cent._ below
the prime cost in _Europe_;—between dependent and independent colonies,
then, in this respect, who can perceive a shadow of difference?
_6thly._
If the _English_ merchants, after having over-stocked the _American_
markets with _European_ goods, have attempted to strip _America_ of the
little money she had to boast of, and to leave her goods on her own
hands, do the complaints set up in _England_ on this subject, prove
any thing essential either to _England_, or to the rest of the world,
more than the impossibility of carrying into execution beyond a certain
degree, the plan, as destructive as it is absurd, of any other trade but
that which is founded on a reciprocity of advantages, on _an exchange of
the gifts with which Nature and Art have favoured one country, against
those with which Nature and Art have favoured another country_? And
even, upon a supposition, that _America_ should have returned under the
domination of _England_, if the _English_ merchants had, in this case,
attempted to wrest from her the little money she was possessed of, would
not the _American_ colonists have been justified in taking every measure
necessary to preserve it?—Would they in enforcing that right have been
free from the misfortune, common to mankind, of always doing, in order to
guard against an injury, much more than is either just or necessary?—The
impossibility of making returns adequate to the extravagant invoices sent
by the _French_ traders to their colonies in _America_, after the war
I have mentioned, determined also the agents of the _French_ trade to
strip those colonies of all the money they could lay their hands upon:
no other way to put a stop to that spoliation was left, but to bore in
the middle of their dollars a large hole, which restoring the equilibrium
between the rapacity of the foreign trader, and the wants of the interior
commerce, preserved within those colonies the trifling sum in specie
that still remained there. Soon after, the equilibrium was also restored
between the imports and the consumption; and from that instant an end was
put to the thirst after money, as well as to the necessity of boring the
dollars.—What difference then can exist, in this respect also, between a
colony and a free State?
_7thly._
All the exports from _England_ to the colonies, the monopoly of which
she has preserved by the peace, (including her trade to _India_)
amounted, in 1773, to 2,430,420_l._ (for the details see Sir _Charles
Whitworth_). Now the annual expence of the _British_ navy, and its
accessaries, considering the increase in that of _France_, must be, at
present, or will be soon, 2,000,000_l._ May it not be fairly concluded,
that _England_ is about to pay the annual sum of 2 millions sterling, in
order to maintain herself in the exclusive privilege of carrying annually
to the distance of 1500, of 2000, of 4 or 6000 leagues, the value of
2,432,420_l._ in _European_ goods?—And would not that privilege be dearly
bought, were not _France_ to lay out annually likewise 45 millions of
livres _tournois_, in protecting her privileged exportation?
_8thly_,
I have at present before my eyes no other standard, whereby to estimate
the exportation of _France_ to her sugar-colonies, than that of _England_
to hers; that exportation amounted, in 1773, to 197,236_l._ But the
population of the _French_ colonies is far from being in a treble
proportion to that of the _English_ colonies, and luxury is equal in
both; yet let us suppose that the amount of the exports from _France_
to her colonies, including those she sends to _India_, be annually 80
millions _tournois_.—The interest of the national debt in _France_ is 202
millions _tournois_, (see _Administration des Finances de la France_)
one half, or rather three fourths of which have been incurred for the
protection of her establishments in those parts of the world.—May it
not be said, that _France_ is at the yearly expence of 150 millions
_tournois_, independently of the 45 millions for her navy, for the
purpose of maintaining herself in the exclusive privilege of exporting
every year the value of 80 millions _tournois_, in _European_ goods, to
her possessions in _India_ and _America_?
_9thly_,
All the _European_ exports, carried by _England_ in the year 1773,
either to _India_, _Africa_, or _America_, including the exports for
which she held an exclusive privilege in the part of _America_ now
independent, amounted to 4,975,192_l._ we shall say 5 millions:—if you
value at 10 millions of the same currency, the exports of all the other
nations of _Europe_ to those parts of the world, we shall find a capital
of 15 millions sterling in goods annually exported from _Europe_:—but
the yearly expence of a navy, which cannot be dispensed with for the
protection of those exports, is valued at 8 millions sterling, 4 of
which fall to the share of _England_ and _France_.
Exclusive of those 8 millions sterling, the interest paid by _England_
to acquire, preserve, and protect that part of _European_ exports that
concerns her, amounts to about 6,500,000_l._ including that of the last
war; the interest paid by _France_, comes nearly to the same sum; the
interest paid by _Spain_ could not be computed, were the depopulation
of that country to be taken into the account; but estimate them at 4
millions, including those which other _European_ nations have sacrificed
to the same Idol: let us say nothing about _Holland_, who for many
years (except the few last) has made some figure _Europe_, only by her
good luck in alleviating the distresses of others, her sole motive for
which was her own advantage: and we shall sum up, at last, an annual
expenditure of 25 millions sterling, in interest and naval expences,
incurred by _Europe_, in order to preserve the exclusive privilege, 1st,
of exporting every year 15 millions sterling in _European_ goods to her
colonies, both in _India_ and _America_; and, 2dly, of establishing in
those colonies _the system of government best calculated to prevent that
exportation from becoming more considerable_.
_10thly_,
We have observed, that the exports from _England_ to the colonies of
_America_, and to _India_, amounted, in 1773, to 4,900 and some thousand
pounds sterling, suppose 5 millions: now her importation of commodities
from those various countries is about 5,900,000_l._ (see Sir _Charles
Whitworth_); but we have also noticed, that she left yearly in _North
America_ 1,282,000_l._ more than she received therefrom. This matter,
considered in the most favourable light, that is, as a balance of trade,
ought to be added to the former; and the whole together will give us a
total of 7 millions, shewing an annual benefit of 2 millions some hundred
thousand pounds sterling.
It appears then, that an annual benefit of 2 millions some hundred
thousand pounds sterling costs _England_ annually 6,500,000_l._ interest
for her debt, and 2 millions for the support of her navy.
_11thly_,
We have seen, that the annual and general exportation of _European_ goods
to _America_ and _India_ amounted to about 15 millions sterling.—If 5
millions of _English_ exports return no more than 2 millions some hundred
thousand pounds annual benefit to _England_, that _England_, who sets
the highest price on her goods of all kinds, the general exportation of
15 millions, to which _England_ contributes only one third, cannot, of
course, afford to the whole of _Europe_, a profit of above 6 millions and
some hundred thousand pounds;—but it seems that a benefit of 6 millions
and some hundred thousand pounds is dearly bought at the rate of 25
millions laid out annually by _Europe_, both in paying the interest of
their respective national debts, and for the support of the _European_
navies designed to preserve, protect, and secure such a benefit.
_12thly_,
If it were very true, as it is to this day asserted, that those 25
millions of annual and indisputable expenditure, are in reality so many
yearly losses to the nations who sustain it, might it not be reasonably
concluded, would it not be impossible not to conclude, that all the
colonies of _Europe_ were established only for her ruin?—If we only
attend to the last war, which in fact loads the different nations who
took a share in it, with an annual interest of 9 or 10 millions,—9 or 10
millions to be paid every year, partly to preserve the right, partly to
obtain the permission of exporting _European_ commodities into a country,
of which the inhabitants, besides their own importation, consume annually
to the amount of only 2,491,230_l._ of those same commodities which are
exported to them by others—who (to assume the trader’s phrase) cannot
clear by that exportation, a greater annual profit than 3, 4, or even
500,000_l._! ... it seems indeed that one cannot see without surprise and
concern, the shocking disproportion between the end proposed, and the
sole means of obtaining it.
_13thly_,
If, on the contrary, it be true, as I maintain it to be, that after the
peace, when a perfect equilibrium is restored to every thing, the 9 or
10 millions interest of the national debt, has no other effect but that
of ADDING TO EVERY THING A NOMINAL VALUE WHICH INJURES NO ONE, THOUGH
IT MAY BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO MANY; A NOMINAL VALUE, WHICH, IN EVERY STATE,
PROPORTIONS ITSELF, FIRST TO THE SUM OF ITS REVENUE COMPARED TO THAT OF
ITS DEBT, AND SOON AFTER TO THE DIFFERENCE WHICH THE DEBT CONTRACTED
BY THE NATION CALLED THE MOST LOADED, AND WHICH, IN FACT, IS ONLY THE
GREATEST EXPORTER, HAS PRODUCED IN THAT ENORMOUS QUANTITY OF THE GOODS
SHE EXPORTS;—if it appear more reasonable to adopt that idea, than to
give up a trade, which, without that very idea, would prove the most
absurd, as well as the most destructive that human genius could invent,
(_the alternative seems to be forcibly established_);—in this case the
regret will be heart-felt, when we consider the loss of men sacrificed
during the last war: but if from this general aggregate of truths little
suspected, and much less reflected upon, there should result a system
of Politics in _Europe_, of Administration in her different States,
of Government in her Colonies, which should procure to _Europe_, at
the least expence, the greatest exportation of that of which she has a
superabundance, and the greatest importation of that in which she is
deficient ... then indeed, then, might we find consolation for the evil,
in adverting to its consequences.—And, upon this principle, what can
_England_ have suffered by losing her sovereignty over _America_?
_14thly_,
The contagion of example has been apprehended. Let us suppose the fact.
What then would be the loss sustained by _Europe_? None, I believe,
unless the consequence of the general independency of the colonies,
should be that they would give up _European_ commodities they have been
used to, and which they can so readily procure by means of a multitude
of other articles, which would be of no value to them were they not
calculated to procure them those _European_ commodities which they are
in the habit of consuming.—But I beg leave to ask, what purpose could
their independence answer?—It appears to me, they could not think of it
without a palpable folly; and that it is impossible they should think of
it, _without that kind of vexation which brings a man to the necessity
of choosing between two extremes_.—Another consideration, which tends to
make _Europe_ easy, at least in regard to the colonies situated beyond
the tropic, is, that no rivalship can subsist between them and their
mother-countries in any thing that concerns the soil and industry.
In regard to the productions of the soil, all that part of _America_
inclosed within even the 30th degree of north, and the 30th degree of
south latitude, could not yield, without double and treble expence,
any thing that can be produced in _Europe_, and in the other part of
_America_, from the 30th degree to the pole. And, on the other hand, at
what an amazing expence must all _Europe_, jointly with that part of
_America_ now independent, produce, even in a kind of degradation, what
the other part of _America_ yields naturally in the most perfect state!
In regard to industry, can it be feared that the _South Americans, even
supposing them independent_, should be tempted to import rough materials
from _Europe_, in order to have them wrought by _American hands, which
are so naturally and so profitably employed in the production of American
articles_? Is it even to be feared that they should aim at a competition
with the _Europeans_ in the exportation of _American_ articles, when they
are in need of ship-timber, or rather when in this, much more than in any
other respects, there is no _European_ work, which, if done in _America_,
would not cost three times as much as when imported from _Europe_?—All
_European_ prejudices, relative to commerce, are founded on the following
principle, which may be looked upon as the _quintessence_ of the
Navigation-Act:—_To do every thing ourselves, in order that no one’s
assistance may be wanted,—that no one may do without our assistance,—and
that no assistance be given, but at the prices prescribed by the Lords of
the Seas._—The Navigation-Act was, without doubt, the last effort of the
human mind about the middle of the 17th century[11].
It seems to me, that the only point which essentially concerns all
_Europe_, in regard to other parts of the world, where she can give law,
would be to find out _what kind of Administration would be the best
calculated to increase in all those parts the consumption of ~European~
_goods, and to procure to herself a more considerable stock of foreign
goods and products,—which would, as they have ever done, give, ~either
directly or indirectly~, a fresh encouragement to her agriculture and
manufactures_. Let any one examine, whether the utility of the colonies
be not strictly confined to this single point.
I speak of all _Europe_, it is true, as if she formed but one State,
whilst she is supposed to exhibit so many interests, and these so very
opposite to each other. This question deserves a deeper discussion than I
am able to give it; yet I presume to think that the answer I could give,
might be susceptible of demonstration, had we, on all the countries in
_Europe_, statements only similar to those which Sir _Charles Whitworth_
has given of the _British_ trade, and were we to add thereto the means
and faculties which are to be met with in _England_ of procuring the
details and proofs of every particular that concerns the public.
Destitute however of an advantage so precious, so worthy of a nation
sufficiently enlightened to dread nothing but being left in the dark
on any part of her own interests, of a nation judicious enough not to
disdain a ray of light, from whatever quarter it may come, and generous
enough to perceive, with pleasure, that by enriching herself, she has, to
this day, enriched all _Europe_;—
If it were admitted, that money is only the representation of value;
that multiplying the sign, without multiplying the articles which it is
calculated to represent, is debasing fruitlessly the representation; and
that, on the contrary, multiplying the article is the most infallible
means of attracting the sign and keeping it up to its value:
If it were acknowledged, that nothing contributes so much to the
multiplying of the articles, as the multiplicity of the channels through
which they can be introduced:
If it were acknowledged, that the multiplicity of channels in another
nation, for the introduction of our own goods, is necessarily inseparable
from the multiplicity of channels opened in our own country for the
introduction of foreign goods:
If it were acknowledged, that with the fullest persuasion that money
ought to be the sole aim of trade, it has only proved, hitherto, the
means of supporting it:
If it were acknowledged, that notwithstanding the prejudices to the
contrary, as deeply rooted in the heads of Ministers, as they are in the
hearts of Merchants, and notwithstanding all the national cupidities,
private interest in all countries has always proved sufficient to reject
effectually all the _useless_, and procure all the _necessary_ money:
If it should result, not from arguments, which very seldom contain what
they ought to contain, in order to become uncontrovertible, but from
the experience of a whole century, sufficient to estimate the effect of
the passion the most ardent, and the most attached to its object, that
contrary to the common ideas, and in spite of the general rage for money,
the whole of commerce has, to this day, been ultimately confined to _its
true balance_, i. e. _to bartering goods for goods_, except the little
money which is wanted every where, and which has constantly penetrated
every where, to answer either to the new productions when they had
actually increased in their quantity, or to the advance of prices when
the taxes had at last produced every where, and on the generality of
prices, their effect, as equitable as it is necessary and harmless:
If the same experience should evince, that the richest individual, or
he who becomes such the soonest, has no other advantage in point of
commerce, than the choice of the men whom he is pleased to admit to a
share of his wealth without impairing it; and that the inference to be
drawn therefrom is, _that such a man must be a dupe who confines his
choice to ten, when he can make it from among thirty_:
If it were acknowledged, that riches and ease, like the light, stand in
want of no assistance whatever, to propagate themselves equally in every
direction, _as general interest requires_; that the private interest of
one man, or of a body of men, is always sufficiently opposed, protected,
balanced, by the interest of another man, or of another body of men,
_wherever administration confines its attention to the maintenance of
strict justice and good order_; and that from this equilibrium in which
they mutually keep, or soon replace one another, there results, for both,
the greatest advantage they can hope for, and for the State the highest
prosperity it can attain:
If it were acknowledged, that on all these various objects, no difference
whatever can subsist between one nation and another:
If it were acknowledged also, that all _Europe_, as well as each State
in particular, is essentially, finally, strictly, composed only of three
kinds of _capitalists_, or proprietors, the _landed capitalist, the
capitalist of industry, and the proprietor of money_, considered either
as a dependant or as a _capitalist_:
If it were acknowledged, that those three interests center in the
greatest quantity, as well as the greatest variety and best quality,
of the products both of agriculture and industry, and in the greatest
consumption of both at the most reasonable rate:
If it were acknowledged, that the _Fisc_, or Exchequer, owes the whole
of its revenue to the produce of the taxes only; and that this produce
rising of course as the productions and consumption increase, the
interest of the Exchequer can no where be different from that of the
three capitalists or proprietors:
If it were acknowledged, that _at present_ nothing can result from
several institutions, pretended very wise, but a great diminution in the
products and consumption, as well as in the revenue of the Exchequer;
because there is nothing so easy as to balance, every where, institutions
pretended very wise, by others not less so:
If it were acknowledged, that the _necessary_ expenditure of the
Exchequer once ascertained, all diminution of its revenue, occasioned by
the pretended very wise institutions, carries with it the necessity of
imposing new taxes, in order to make up the _deficit_ of former ones:
If it were acknowledged, that each new tax, increasing necessarily the
price of every thing in the nation, _for the purpose of supporting, at
least, the interior consumption, on which depends the discharge of the
taxes_, would add to the inconvenience brought about by those pretended
very wise regulations, _and would soon lead to a decrease in the external
consumption, which the nation might have preserved_, if other countries
did not raise their own prices accordingly, in order to pay with the
same products the same quantity of articles which they used to take
before the advance occasioned by the taxes; that therefore such a general
propagation of increase in prices, being of a general interest to the
production and consumption every where, would not fail to take place
every where as it has always done, and to dwindle again into a childish
play, much beneath the adolescence of the age we live in:
If it were acknowledged, that the general repeal of those pretended very
wise institutions could, at the worst, be productive of no other effect
_within the State_, but that of a general rise in the prices, wherever
they are not in due proportion to the real values, and a general fall
in all the prices, wherever they are fixed by monopoly, and not by the
natural equilibrium; but that, whereas nothing but profit can accrue to
those who raise their prices, it is very probable that the prices would
increase much more almost _every where_, than they would decrease _any
where_:
If it were, besides, acknowledged that such an increase, or decrease,
(it matters not which) soon becoming general and proportionate, (without
any other agent to work that miracle, but that reciprocal pressure which
establishes a perfect symmetry in a bee-hive,) then no alteration could
arise therefrom in the circumstances of the two essential capitalists,
since it is perfectly indifferent whether we purchase the labour of
others at 5 or 6 _per cent._ dearer, if we sell our own labour in
proportion:
If it were acknowledged, that in regard to the money proprietor, _whether
dependant or capitalist_, nothing can result from it but the certainty
of procuring henceforth and for ever, at the most equitable price,
that which he had paid for hitherto according to the rate set on it by
monopoly, and often by a scarcity cunningly prepared and managed:
If it were acknowledged, that _as to the external interests of the
State_, no other effect can result from the general repeal of those
pretended very wise institutions, but the facilitating of all the
branches of foreign correspondence, the opening of new channels of
consumption, the encouragement of all kinds of production, of which
consumption is the very soul, and the power of obtaining every where, at
the most equitable prices, _by means of competition_, the most equitable
share we have a right to expect in those gifts which nature, in all
probability, has not bestowed on any part of the world, to confine them
to that particular spot:
If all the foregoing points, I say, were acknowledged, it would be a hard
matter to conceive that there is, not only in _Europe_, but all over the
globe, any other enemy to destroy but Monopoly, or any other interest to
favour but Labour.