<SPAN name="ch7parEb4"></SPAN>
<p>The monopoly of the colony trade, besides, by forcing towards it a much
greater proportion of the capital of Great Britain than what would
naturally have gone to it, seems to have broken altogether that natural
balance which would otherwise have taken place among all the different
branches of British industry. The industry of Great Britain, instead of
being accommodated to a great number of small markets, has been
principally suited to one great market. Her commerce, instead of running
in a great number of small channels, has been taught to run principally in
one great channel. But the whole system of her industry and commerce has
thereby been rendered less secure; the whole state of her body politic
less healthful than it otherwise would have been. In her present
condition, Great Britain resembles one of those unwholesome bodies in
which some of the vital parts are overgrown, and which, upon that account,
are liable to many dangerous disorders, scarce incident to those in which
all the parts are more properly proportioned. A small stop in that great
blood-vessel, which has been artificially swelled beyond its natural
dimensions, and through which an unnatural proportion of the industry and
commerce of the country has been forced to circulate, is very likely to
bring on the most dangerous disorders upon the whole body politic. The
expectation of a rupture with the colonies, accordingly, has struck the
people of Great Britain with more terror than they ever felt for a Spanish
armada, or a French invasion. It was this terror, whether well or ill
grounded, which rendered the repeal of the stamp act, among the merchants
at least, a popular measure. In the total exclusion from the colony
market, was it to last only for a few years, the greater part of our
merchants used to fancy that they foresaw an entire stop to their trade;
the greater part of our master manufacturers, the entire ruin of their
business; and the greater part of our workmen, an end of their employment.
A rupture with any of our neighbours upon the continent, though likely,
too, to occasion some stop or interruption in the employments of some of
all these different orders of people, is foreseen, however, without any
such general emotion. The blood, of which the circulation is stopt in some
of the smaller vessels, easily disgorges itself into the greater, without
occasioning any dangerous disorder; but, when it is stopt in any of the
greater vessels, convulsions, apoplexy, or death, are the immediate and
unavoidable consequences. If but one of those overgrown manufactures,
which, by means either of bounties or of the monopoly of the home and
colony markets, have been artificially raised up to any unnatural height,
finds some small stop or interruption in its employment, it frequently
occasions a mutiny and disorder alarming to government, and embarrassing
even to the deliberations of the legislature. How great, therefore, would
be the disorder and confusion, it was thought, which must necessarily be
occasioned by a sudden and entire stop in the employment of so great a
proportion of our principal manufacturers?</p>
<p>Some moderate and gradual relaxation of the laws which give to Great
Britain the exclusive trade to the colonies, till it is rendered in a
great measure free, seems to be the only expedient which can, in all
future times, deliver her from this danger; which can enable her, or even
force her, to withdraw some part of her capital from this overgrown
employment, and to turn it, though with less profit, towards other
employments; and which, by gradually diminishing one branch of her
industry, and gradually increasing all the rest, can, by degrees, restore
all the different branches of it to that natural, healthful, and proper
proportion, which perfect liberty necessarily establishes, and which
perfect liberty can alone preserve. To open the colony trade all at once
to all nations, might not only occasion some transitory inconveniency, but
a great permanent loss, to the greater part of those whose industry or
capital is at present engaged in it. The sudden loss of the employment,
even of the ships which import the eighty-two thousand hogsheads of
tobacco, which are over and above the consumption of Great Britain, might
alone be felt very sensibly. Such are the unfortunate effects of all the
regulations of the mercantile system. They not only introduce very
dangerous disorders into the state of the body politic, but disorders
which it is often difficult to remedy, without occasioning, for a time at
least, still greater disorders. In what manner, therefore, the colony
trade ought gradually to be opened; what are the restraints which ought
first, and what are those which ought last, to be taken away; or in what
manner the natural system of perfect liberty and justice ought gradually
to be restored, we must leave to the wisdom of future statesmen and
legislators to determine.</p>
<p>Five different events, unforeseen and unthought of, have very fortunately
concurred to hinder Great Britain from feeling, so sensibly as it was
generally expected she would, the total exclusion which has now taken
place for more than a year (from the first of December 1774) from a very
important branch of the colony trade, that of the twelve associated
provinces of North America. First, those colonies, in preparing themselves
for their non-importation agreement, drained Great Britain completely of
all the commodities which were fit for their market; secondly, the extra
ordinary demand of the Spanish flota has, this year, drained Germany and
the north of many commodities, linen in particular, which used to come
into competition, even in the British market, with the manufactures of
Great Britain; thirdly, the peace between Russia and Turkey has occasioned
an extraordinary demand from the Turkey market, which, during the distress
of the country, and while a Russian fleet was cruizing in the Archipelago,
had been very poorly supplied; fourthly, the demand of the north of Europe
for the manufactures of Great Britain has been increasing from year to
year, for some time past; and, fifthly, the late partition, and
consequential pacification of Poland, by opening the market of that great
country, have, this year, added an extraordinary demand from thence to the
increasing demand of the north. These events are all, except the fourth,
in their nature transitory and accidental; and the exclusion from so
important a branch of the colony trade, if unfortunately it should
continue much longer, may still occasion some degree of distress. This
distress, however, as it will come on gradually, will be felt much less
severely than if it had come on all at once; and, in the mean time, the
industry and capital of the country may find a new employment and
direction, so as to prevent this distress from ever rising to any
considerable height.</p>
<p>The monopoly of the colony trade, therefore, so far as it has turned
towards that trade a greater proportion of the capital of Great Britain
than what would otherwise have gone to it, has in all cases turned it,
from a foreign trade of consumption with a neighbouring, into one with a
more distant country; in many cases from a direct foreign trade of
consumption into a round-about one; and, in some cases, from all foreign
trade of consumption into a carrying trade. It has, in all cases,
therefore, turned it from a direction in which it would have maintained a
greater quantity of productive labour, into one in which it can maintain a
much smaller quantity. By suiting, besides, to one particular market only,
so great a part of the industry and commerce of Great Britain, it has
rendered the whole state of that industry and commerce more precarious and
less secure, than if their produce had been accommodated to a greater
variety of markets.</p>
<p>We must carefully distinguish between the effects of the colony trade and
those of the monopoly of that trade. The former are always and necessarily
beneficial; the latter always and necessarily hurtful. But the former are
so beneficial, that the colony trade, though subject to a monopoly, and,
notwithstanding the hurtful effects of that monopoly, is still, upon the
whole, beneficial, and greatly beneficial, though a good deal less so than
it otherwise would be.</p>
<p>The effect of the colony trade, in its natural and free state, is to open
a great though distant market, for such parts of the produce of British
industry as may exceed the demand of the markets nearer home, of those of
Europe, and of the countries which lie round the Mediterranean sea. In its
natural and free state, the colony trade, without drawing from those
markets any part of the produce which had ever been sent to them,
encourages Great Britain to increase the surplus continually, by
continually presenting new equivalents to be exchanged for it. In its
natural and free state, the colony trade tends to increase the quantity of
productive labour in Great Britain, but without altering in any respect
the direction of that which had been employed there before. In the natural
and free state of the colony trade, the competition of all other nations
would hinder the rate of profit from rising above the common level, either
in the new market, or in the new employment. The new market, without
drawing any thing from the old one, would create, if one may say so, a new
produce for its own supply; and that new produce would constitute a new
capital for carrying on the new employment, which, in the same manner,
would draw nothing from the old one.</p>
<p>The monopoly of the colony trade, on the contrary, by excluding the
competition of other nations, and thereby raising the rate of profit, both
in the new market and in the new employment, draws produce from the old
market, and capital from the old employment. To augment our share of the
colony trade beyond what it otherwise would be, is the avowed purpose of
the monopoly. If our share of that trade were to be no greater with, than
it would have been without the monopoly, there could have been no reason
for establishing the monopoly. But whatever forces into a branch of trade,
of which the returns are slower and more distant than those of the greater
part of other trades, a greater proportion of the capital of any country,
than what of its own accord would go to that branch, necessarily renders
the whole quantity of productive labour annually maintained there, the
whole annual produce of the land and labour of that country, less than
they otherwise would be. It keeps down the revenue of the inhabitants of
that country below what it would naturally rise to, and thereby diminishes
their power of accumulation. It not only hinders, at all times, their
capital from maintaining so great a quantity of productive labour as it
would otherwise maintain, but it hinders it from increasing so fast as it
would otherwise increase, and, consequently, from maintaining a still
greater quantity of productive labour.</p>
<p>The natural good effects of the colony trade, however, more than
counterbalance to Great Britain the bad effects of the monopoly; so that,
monopoly and altogether, that trade, even as it is carried on at present,
is not only advantageous, but greatly advantageous. The new market and the
new employment which are opened by the colony trade, are of much greater
extent than that portion of the old market and of the old employment which
is lost by the monopoly. The new produce and the new capital which has
been created, if one may say so, by the colony trade, maintain in Great
Britain a greater quantity of productive labour than what can have been
thrown out of employment by the revulsion of capital from other trades of
which the returns are more frequent. If the colony trade, however, even as
it is carried on at present, is advantageous to Great Britain, it is not
by means of the monopoly, but in spite of the monopoly.</p>
<p>It is rather for the manufactured than for the rude produce of Europe,
that the colony trade opens a new market. Agriculture is the proper
business of all new colonies; a business which the cheapness of land
renders more advantageous than any other. They abound, therefore, in the
rude produce of land; and instead of importing it from other countries,
they have generally a large surplus to export. In new colonies,
agriculture either draws hands from all other employments, or keeps them
from going to any other employment. There are few hands to spare for the
necessary, and none for the ornamental manufactures. The greater part of
the manufactures of both kinds they find it cheaper to purchase of other
countries than to make for themselves. It is chiefly by encouraging the
manufactures of Europe, that the colony trade indirectly encourages its
agriculture. The manufacturers of Europe, to whom that trade gives
employment, constitute a new market for the produce of the land, and the
most advantageous of all markets; the home market for the corn and cattle,
for the bread and butcher's meat of Europe, is thus greatly extended by
means of the trade to America.</p>
<p>But that the monopoly of the trade of populous and thriving colonies is
not alone sufficient to establish, or even to maintain, manufactures in
any country, the examples of Spain and Portugal sufficiently demonstrate.
Spain and Portugal were manufacturing countries before they had any
considerable colonies. Since they had the richest and most fertile in the
world, they have both ceased to be so.</p>
<p>In Spain and Portugal, the bad effects of the monopoly, aggravated by
other causes, have, perhaps, nearly overbalanced the natural good effects
of the colony trade. These causes seem to be other monopolies of different
kinds: the degradation of the value of gold and silver below what it is in
most other countries; the exclusion from foreign markets by improper taxes
upon exportation, and the narrowing of the home market, by still more
improper taxes upon the transportation of goods from one part of the
country to another; but above all, that irregular and partial
administration of justice which often protects the rich and powerful
debtor from the pursuit of his injured creditor, and which makes the
industrious part of the nation afraid to prepare goods for the consumption
of those haughty and great men, to whom they dare not refuse to sell upon
credit, and from whom they are altogether uncertain of repayment.</p>
<p>In England, on the contrary, the natural good effects of the colony trade,
assisted by other causes, have in a great measure conquered the bad
effects of the monopoly. These causes seem to be, the general liberty of
trade, which, notwithstanding some restraints, is at least equal, perhaps
superior, to what it is in any other country; the liberty of exporting,
duty free, almost all sorts of goods which are the produce of domestic
industry, to almost any foreign country; and what, perhaps, is of still
greater importance, the unbounded liberty of transporting them from one
part of our own country to any other, without being obliged to give any
account to any public office, without being liable to question or
examination of any kind; but, above all, that equal and impartial
administration of justice, which renders the rights of the meanest British
subject respectable to the greatest, and which, by securing to every man
the fruits of his own industry, gives the greatest and most effectual
encouragement to every sort of industry.</p>
<p>If the manufactures of Great Britain, however, have been advanced, as they
certainly have, by the colony trade, it has not been by means of the
monopoly of that trade, but in spite of the monopoly. The effect of the
monopoly has been, not to augment the quantity, but to alter the quality
and shape of a part of the manufactures of Great Britain, and to
accommodate to a market, from which the returns are slow and distant, what
would otherwise have been accommodated to one from which the returns are
frequent and near. Its effect has consequently been, to turn a part of the
capital of Great Britain from an employment in which it would have
maintained a greater quantity of manufacturing industry, to one in which
it maintains a much smaller, and thereby to diminish, instead of
increasing, the whole quantity of manufacturing industry maintained in
Great Britain.</p>
<p>The monopoly of the colony trade, therefore, like all the other mean and
malignant expedients of the mercantile system, depresses the industry of
all other countries, but chiefly that of the colonies, without in the
least increasing, but on the contrary diminishing, that of the country in
whose favour it is established.</p>
<p>The monopoly hinders the capital of that country, whatever may, at any
particular time, be the extent of that capital, from maintaining so great
a quantity of productive labour as it would otherwise maintain, and from
affording so great a revenue to the industrious inhabitants as it would
otherwise afford. But as capital can be increased only by savings from
revenue, the monopoly, by hindering it from affording so great a revenue
as it would otherwise afford, necessarily hinders it from increasing so
fast as it would otherwise increase, and consequently from maintaining a
still greater quantity of productive labour, and affording a still greater
revenue to the industrious inhabitants of that country. One great original
source of revenue, therefore, the wages of labour, the monopoly must
necessarily have rendered, at all times, less abundant than it otherwise
would have been.</p>
<p>By raising the rate of mercantile profit, the monopoly discourages the
improvement of land. The profit of improvement depends upon the difference
between what the land actually produces, and what, by the application of a
certain capital, it can be made to produce. If this difference affords a
greater profit than what can be drawn from an equal capital in any
mercantile employment, the improvement of land will draw capital from all
mercantile employments. If the profit is less, mercantile employments will
draw capital from the improvement of land. Whatever, therefore, raises the
rate of mercantile profit, either lessens the superiority, or increases
the inferiority of the profit of improvement: and, in the one case,
hinders capital from going to improvement, and in the other draws capital
from it; but by discouraging improvement, the monopoly necessarily retards
the natural increase of another great original source of revenue, the rent
of land. By raising the rate of profit, too, the monopoly necessarily
keeps up the market rate of interest higher than it otherwise would be.
But the price of land, in proportion to the rent which it affords, the
number of years purchase which is commonly paid for it, necessarily falls
as the rate of interest rises, and rises as the rate of interest falls.
The monopoly, therefore, hurts the interest of the landlord two different
ways, by retarding the natural increase, first, of his rent, and,
secondly, of the price which he would get for his land, in proportion to
the rent which it affords.</p>
<p>The monopoly, indeed, raises the rate of mercantile profit and thereby
augments somewhat the gain of our merchants. But as it obstructs the
natural increase of capital, it tends rather to diminish than to increase
the sum total of the revenue which the inhabitants of the country derive
from the profits of stock; a small profit upon a great capital generally
affording a greater revenue than a great profit upon a small one. The
monopoly raises the rate of profit, but it hinders the sum of profit from
rising so high as it otherwise would do.</p>
<p>All the original sources of revenue, the wages of labour, the rent of
land, and the profits of stock, the monopoly renders much less abundant
than they otherwise would be. To promote the little interest of one little
order of men in one country, it hurts the interest of all other orders of
men in that country, and of all the men in all other countries.</p>
<p>It is solely by raising the ordinary rate of profit, that the monopoly
either has proved, or could prove, advantageous to any one particular
order of men. But besides all the bad effects to the country in general,
which have already been mentioned as necessarily resulting from a higher
rate of profit, there is one more fatal, perhaps, than all these put
together, but which, if we may judge from experience, is inseparably
connected with it. The high rate of profit seems everywhere to destroy
that parsimony which, in other circumstances, is natural to the character
of the merchant. When profits are high, that sober virtue seems to be
superfluous, and expensive luxury to suit better the affluence of his
situation. But the owners of the great mercantile capitals are necessarily
the leaders and conductors of the whole industry of every nation; and
their example has a much greater influence upon the manners of the whole
industrious part of it than that of any other order of men. If his
employer is attentive and parsimonious, the workman is very likely to be
so too; but if the master is dissolute and disorderly, the servant, who
shapes his work according to the pattern which his master prescribes to
him, will shape his life, too, according to the example which he sets him.
Accumulation is thus prevented in the hands of all those who are naturally
the most disposed to accumulate; and the funds destined for the
maintenance of productive labour, receive no augmentation from the revenue
of those who ought naturally to augment them the most. The capital of the
country, instead of increasing, gradually dwindles away, and the quantity
of productive labour maintained in it grows every day less and less. Have
the exorbitant profits of the merchants of Cadiz and Lisbon augmented the
capital of Spain and Portugal? Have they alleviated the poverty, have they
promoted the industry, of those two beggarly countries? Such has been the
tone of mercantile expense in those two trading cities, that those
exorbitant profits, far from augmenting the general capital of the
country, seem scarce to have been sufficient to keep up the capitals upon
which they were made. Foreign capitals are every day intruding themselves,
if I may say so, more and more into the trade of Cadiz and Lisbon. It is
to expel those foreign capitals from a trade which their own grows every
day more and more insufficient for carrying on, that the Spaniards and
Portuguese endeavour every day to straiten more and more the galling bands
of their absurd monopoly. Compare the mercantile manners of Cadiz and
Lisbon with those of Amsterdam, and you will be sensible how differently
the conduct and character of merchants are affected by the high and by the
low profits of stock. The merchants of London, indeed, have not yet
generally become such magnificent lords as those of Cadiz and Lisbon; but
neither are they in general such attetitive and parsimonious burghers as
those of Amsterdam. They are supposed, however, many of them, to be a good
deal richer than the greater part of the former, and not quire so rich as
many of the latter: but the rate of their profit is commonly much lower
than that of the former, and a good deal higher than that of the latter.
Light come, light go, says the proverb; and the ordinary tone of expense
seems everywhere to be regulated, not so much according to the real
ability of spending, as to the supposed facility of getting money to
spend.</p>
<p>It is thus that the single advantage which the monopoly procures to a
single order of men, is in many different ways hurtful to the general
interest of the country.</p>
<p>To found a great empire for the sole purpose of raising up a people of
customers, may at first sight, appear a project fit only for a nation of
shopkeepers. It is, however, a project altogether unfit for a nation of
shopkeepers, but extremely fit for a nation whose government is influenced
by shopkeepers. Such statesmen, and such statesmen only, are capable of
fancying that they will find some advantage in employing the blood and
treasure of their fellow-citizens, to found and maintain such an empire.
Say to a shopkeeper, Buy me a good estate, and I shall always buy my
clothes at your shop, even though I should pay somewhat dearer than what I
can have them for at other shops; and you will not find him very forward
to embrace your proposal. But should any other person buy you such an
estate, the shopkeeper will be much obliged to your benefactor if he would
enjoin you to buy all your clothes at his shop. England purchased for some
of her subjects, who found themselves uneasy at home, a great estate in a
distant country. The price, indeed, was very small, and instead of thirty
years purchase, the ordinary price of land in the present times, it
amounted to little more than the expense of the different equipments which
made the first discovery, reconnoitered the coast, and took a fictitious
possession of the country. The land was good, and of great extent; and the
cultivators having plenty of good ground to work upon, and being for some
time at liberty to sell their produce where they pleased, became, in the
course of little more than thirty or forty years (between 1620 and 1660),
so numerous and thriving a people, that the shopkeepers and other traders
of England wished to secure to themselves the monopoly of their custom.
Without pretending, therefore, that they had paid any part, either of the
original purchase money, or of the subsequent expense of improvement, they
petitioned the parliament, that the cultivators of America might for the
future be confined to their shop; first, for buying all the goods which
they wanted from Europe; and, secondly, for selling all such parts of
their own produce as those traders might find it convenient to buy. For
they did not find it convenient to buy every part of it. Some parts of it
imported into England, might have interfered with some of the trades which
they themselves carried on at home. Those particular parts of it,
therefore, they were willing that the colonists should sell where they
could; the farther off the better; and upon that account proposed that
their market should be confined to the countries south of Cape Finisterre.
A clause in the famous act of navigation established this truly shopkeeper
proposal into a law.</p>
<p>The maintenance of this monopoly has hitherto been the principal, or more
properly, perhaps, the sole end and purpose of the dominion which Great
Britain assumes over her colonies. In the exclusive trade, it is supposed,
consists the great advantage of provinces, which have never yet afforded
either revenue or military force for the support of the civil government,
or the defence of the mother country. The monopoly is the principal badge
of their dependency, and it is the sole fruit which has hitherto been
gathered from that dependency. Whatever expense Great Britain has hitherto
laid out in maintaining this dependency, has really been laid out in order
to support this monopoly. The expense of the ordinary peace establishment
of the colonies amounted, before the commencement of the present
disturbances to the pay of twenty regiments of foot; to the expense of the
artillery, stores, and extraordinary provisions, with which it was
necessary to supply them; and to the expense of a very considerable naval
force, which was constantly kept up, in order to guard from the smuggling
vessels of other nations, the immense coast of North America, and that of
our West Indian islands. The whole expense of this peace establishment was
a charge upon the revenue of Great Britain, and was, at the same time, the
smallest part of what the dominion of the colonies has cost the mother
country. If we would know the amount of the whole, we must add to the
annual expense of this peace establishment, the interest of the sums
which, in consequence of their considering her colonies as provinces
subject to her dominion, Great Britain has, upon different occasions, laid
out upon their defence. We must add to it, in particular, the whole
expense of the late war, and a great part of that of the war which
preceded it. The late war was altogether a colony quarrel; and the whole
expense of it, in whatever part of the world it might have been laid out,
whether in Germany or the East Indies, ought justly to be stated to the
account of the colonies. It amounted to more than ninety millions
sterling, including not only the new debt which was contracted, but the
two shillings in the pound additional land tax, and the sums which were
every year borrowed from the sinking fund. The Spanish war which began in
1739 was principally a colony quarrel. Its principal object was to prevent
the search of the colony ships, which carried on a contraband trade with
the Spanish Main. This whole expense is, in reality, a bounty which has
been given in order to support a monopoly. The pretended purpose of it was
to encourage the manufactures, and to increase the commerce of Great
Britain. But its real effect has been to raise the rate of mercantile
profit, and to enable our merchants to turn into a branch of trade, of
which the returns are more slow and distant than those of the greater part
of other trades, a greater proportion of their capital than they otherwise
would have done; two events which, if a bounty could have prevented, it
might perhaps have been very well worth while to give such a bounty.</p>
<p>Under the present system of management, therefore, Great Britain derives
nothing but loss from the dominion which she assumes over her colonies.</p>
<p>To propose that Great Britain should voluntarily give up all authority
over her colonies, and leave them to elect their own magistrates, to enact
their own laws, and to make peace and war, as they might think proper,
would be to propose such a measure as never was, and never will be,
adopted by any nation in the world. No nation ever voluntarily gave up the
dominion of any province, how troublesome soever it might be to govern it,
and how small soever the revenue which it afforded might be in proportion
to the expense which it occasioned. Such sacrifices, though they might
frequently be agreeable to the interest, are always mortifying to the
pride of every nation; and, what is perhaps of still greater consequence,
they are always contrary to the private interest of the governing part of
it, who would thereby be deprived of the disposal of many places of trust
and profit, of many opportunities of acquiring wealth and distinction,
which the possession of the most turbulent, and, to the great body of the
people, the most unprofitable province, seldom fails to afford. The most
visionary enthusiasts would scarce be capable of proposing such a measure,
with any serious hopes at least of its ever being adopted. If it was
adopted, however, Great Britain would not only be immediately freed from
the whole annual expense of the peace establishment of the colonies, but
might settle with them such a treaty of commerce as would effectually
secure to her a free trade, more advantageous to the great body of the
people, though less so to the merchants, than the monopoly which she at
present enjoys. By thus parting good friends, the natural affection of the
colonies to the mother country, which, perhaps, our late dissensions have
well nigh extinguished, would quickly revive. It might dispose them not
only to respect, for whole centuries together, that treaty of commerce
which they had concluded with us at parting, but to favour us in war as
well as in trade, and instead of turbulent and factious subjects, to
become our most faithful, affectionate, and generous allies; and the same
sort of parental affection on the one side, and filial respect on the
other, might revive between Great Britain and her colonies, which used to
subsist between those of ancient Greece and the mother city from which
they descended.</p>
<p>In order to render any province advantageous to the empire to which it
belongs, it ought to afford, in time of peace, a revenue to the public,
sufficient not only for defraying the whole expense of its own peace
establishment, but for contributing its proportion to the support of the
general government of the empire. Every province necessarily contributes,
more or less, to increase the expense of that general government. If any
particular province, therefore, does not contribute its share towards
defraying this expense, an unequal burden must be thrown upon some other
part of the empire. The extraordinary revenue, too, which every province
affords to the public in time of war, ought, from parity of reason, to
bear the same proportion to the extraordinary revenue of the whole empire,
which its ordinary revenue does in time of peace. That neither the
ordinary nor extraordinary revenue which Great Britain derives from her
colonies, bears this proportion to the whole revenue of the British
empire, will readily be allowed. The monopoly, it has been supposed,
indeed, by increasing the private revenue of the people of Great Britain,
and thereby enabling them to pay greater taxes, compensates the deficiency
of the public revenue of the colonies. But this monopoly, I have
endeavoured to show, though a very grievous tax upon the colonies, and
though it may increase the revenue of a particular order of men in Great
Britain, diminishes, instead of increasing, that of the great body of the
people, and consequently diminishes, instead of increasing, the ability of
the great body of the people to pay taxes. The men, too, whose revenue the
monopoly increases, constitute a particular order, which it is both
absolutely impossible to tax beyond the proportion of other orders, and
extremely impolitic even to attempt to tax beyond that proportion, as I
shall endeavour to show in the following book. No particular resource,
therefore, can be drawn from this particular order.</p>
<p>The colonies may be taxed either by their own assemblies, or by the
parliament of Great Britain.</p>
<p>That the colony assemblies can never be so managed as to levy upon their
constituents a public revenue, sufficient, not only to maintain at all
times their own civil and military establishment, but to pay their proper
proportion of the expense of the general government of the British empire,
seems not very probable. It was a long time before even the parliament of
England, though placed immediately under the eye of the sovereign, could
be brought under such a system of management, or could be rendered
sufficiently liberal in their grants for supporting the civil and military
establishments even of their own country. It was only by distributing
among the particular members of parliament a great part either of the
offices, or of the disposal of the offices arising from this civil and
military establishment, that such a system of management could be
established, even with regard to the parliament of England. But the
distance of the colony assemblies from the eye of the sovereign, their
number, their dispersed situation, and their various constitutions, would
render it very difficult to manage them in the same manner, even though
the sovereign had the same means of doing it; and those means are wanting.
It would be absolutely impossible to distribute among all the leading
members of all the colony assemblies such a share, either of the offices,
or of the disposal of the offices, arising from the general government of
the British empire, as to dispose them to give up their popularity at
home, and to tax their constituents for the support of that general
government, of which almost the whole emoluments were to be divided among
people who were strangers to them. The unavoidable ignorance of
administration, besides, concerning the relative importance of the
different members of those different assemblies, the offences which must
frequently be given, the blunders which must constantly be committed, in
attempting to manage them in this manner, seems to render such a system of
management altogether impracticable with regard to them.</p>
<p>The colony assemblies, besides, cannot be supposed the proper judges of
what is necessary for the defence and support of the whole empire. The
care of that defence and support is not entrusted to them. It is not their
business, and they have no regular means of information concerning it. The
assembly of a province, like the vestry of a parish, may judge very
properly concerning the affairs of its own particular district, but can
have no proper means of judging concerning those of the whole empire. It
cannot even judge properly concerning the proportion which its own
province bears to the whole empire, or concerning the relative degree of
its wealth and importance, compared with the other provinces; because
those other provinces are not under the inspection and superintendency of
the assembly of a particular province. What is necessary for the defence
and support of the whole empire, and in what proportion each part ought to
contribute, can be judged of only by that assembly which inspects and
super-intends the affairs of the whole empire.</p>
<p>It has been proposed, accordingly, that the colonies should be taxed by
requisition, the parliament of Great Britain determining the sum which
each colony ought to pay, and the provincial assembly assessing and
levying it in the way that suited best the circumstances of the province.
What concerned the whole empire would in this way be determined by the
assembly which inspects and superintends the affairs of the whole empire;
and the provincial affairs of each colony might still be regulated by its
own assembly. Though the colonies should, in this case, have no
representatives in the British parliament, yet, if we may judge by
experience, there is no probability that the parliamentary requisition
would be unreasonable. The parliament of England has not, upon any
occasion, shewn the smallest disposition to overburden those parts of the
empire which are not represented in parliament. The islands of Guernsey
and Jersey, without any means of resisting the authority of parliament,
are more lightly taxed than any part of Great Britain. Parliament, in
attempting to exercise its supposed right, whether well or ill grounded,
of taxing the colonies, has never hitherto demanded of them anything which
even approached to a just proportion to what was paid by their fellow
subjects at home. If the contribution of the colonies, besides, was to
rise or fall in proportion to the rise or fall of the land-tax, parliament
could not tax them without taxing, at the same time, its own constituents,
and the colonies might, in this case, be considered as virtually
represented in parliament.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />