ring the last twenty years, to sixty thousand tons, and that during that period, only twenty-two thousand tons of every species of manufacture (including beer, and seven thousand tons of wine) have been actually engaged and shipped to India: and at this very moment, my Lord, when a want of tonnage is so loudly complained of to export British manufacture, country ships are under the necessity of returning to India without cargoes, no individual being inclined to ship goods for which he knows too well there is not any sale in the Indian markets.

The leading arguments made use of by the supporter of an open trade, are founded upon the doctrine held by Dr. Adam Smith, whose opinions on the subject of Monopoly, will always, theoretically speaking, carry great weight, but when reduced to practice, will lose much of their convincing powers. He continually sets up theory against experience, and possibilities against facts. Monopolies are only bad, when they engross a trade to the prejudice of the community at large, and oblige them to become purchasers of indispensable commodities at an exorbitant rate, whereas the Monopoly, if it can be so called, (considering the general acceptation of the word) enjoyed by the East India Company, enables the inhabitants of this kingdom to obtain every article of Indian produce at the very lowest possible rate, and of the best quality.

While I am as much disposed as any other individual to receive with deference the doctrines enforced by so able a writer as Adam Smith, I cannot shut my ears to the arguments of men, who have been held in equal estimation for their talents and knowledge in national policy: I shall therefore quote the opinion of Wattel, referred to by Mr. Macpherson, in his work, page 342, viz. "Commerce is the common good of the nation, all the members of which have an equal right to it. Monopoly is therefore in general contrary to that right. To this rule there are nevertheless some exceptions founded upon the GENERAL INTEREST OF THE NATION; and in some cases "a WISE Government' may establish a Monopoly. There are some commercial enterprises which cannot be accomplished without an armed force, and require great capitals beyond the power of private individuals. THERE ARE OTHERS WHICH WOULD

1 A wise Government, His Majesty's present government may possibly feel that they cannot lay claim to such a justification for continuing the exclusive privilege of the Company.

SOON RUIN THE UNDERTAKERS, IF THEY WERE NOT CONDUCTED WITH GREAT PRUDENCE AND HARMONY OF COUNCILS TOGETHER WITH AN UNREMITTING PERSEVERANCE IN ESTABLISHED MAXIMS AND RULES. As such branches of Commerce cannot be carried on by individuals; companies are formed under the authority of Government, AND AS SUCH COMPANIES CANNOT BE SUPPORTED IF OTHERS ARE PERMITTED TO INTERFERE IN THEIR TRADE, IT IS ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE NATION AT LARGE THAT CERTAIN PRIVILEGES SHOULD BE CONFIRMED TO THEM."

A noble author,' writing on the subject of Political Economy, observes, that commerce, pushed to the extent to which the spirit of speculation would induce individuals to carry it, would involve not only themselves but their country in inevitable ruin: it may, therefore, be urged with great reason, that the Indian Trade, being reserved to the East India Company, not only causes a regular and ample supply of Indian produce, but is the cause of preventing numerous individuals from embarking in a trade, which cannot produce to the nation at large, much less to the persons who seek to have the India and China trade thrown open, those advantages which are so strenuously held forth, but so delusively conceived. It is no easy matter to convince any set of men of their error, who fancy their interests and fortunes are concerned in prosecuting a measure, no inatter how absurd, when calmly contemplated; it therefore becomes an imperative duty on those who have the power in their own hands, not to get rid of it before they are convinced it will not be used in a manner detrimental to the state.

At the meetings of our manufacturing towns, it has been resolved, that the exclusive privileges of the East India Company are a monopoly, and that it is for the interest of the manufacturers that the monopoly should be done away. In the words of the late Lord Melville, I would wish to ask the projectors of such Reso¬ lutions, whether they have examined what the Company has been, or what it now is? To whom do they owe the riches which they have acquired from the cotton manufactures? To the East India Company! To whom do they owe the riches which they have ac

Lord Kaimes,

quired from the cultivation of indigo? To the East India Company! To whom has Great Britain been indebted for the great increase of its shipping? To the East India Company! If from other sources our industry and navigation have been increased, the original obligation is not on that account the less, and ought not to be forgotten: some small gratitude is surely due for all these benefits.

"The representation of the grievous hardships of excluding the great body of the nation from the trade for the benefit of the few is very plausible, and likely to catch the assent of those who do not bestow much thought upon the matter. Let us consider the effect of an abolition of this hardship. In the great body of the nation there are but very few individuals desirous of entering actively into the trade; therefore all the rest of the people, being at least ninety-nine thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine, in one hundred thousand, feel no deprivation of that which they do not desire to have. The truth is, that the abolition of the Company's privileges would deprive them of their rights held under the sanction of the law; and very much impair the property of all the proprietors of India Stock. Neither ought it to be forgotten that there are at all times some proprietors of the Stock of this envied monopoly who are willing to dispose of it, and that no person of either sex, or of whatever condition, age, religion, or country, is debarred from purchasing."

It is generally admitted that, for the first three or four years, the Indian trade may be carried on at a loss, but it will ultimately prove beneficial. I may be permitted to ask, whether the revenue of this country is in so florishing a state that ministers can afford to risque a certain income of between four and five millions in that time; and what is proposed to be done with the produce of India which shall be brought to this country, the warehouses of which are overstocked to the amount of ten millions? and, vice versa, with respect to the export of British manufactures to India, which may be bought there for prime cost?

The result of an Open Trade will be the accumulation of difficulty and misfortune.

I now come to the proposition for a transfer of the Trade to the Out-ports. The arguments already urged against opening the Trade

even to the Port of London, will apply with a redoubled force to this proposition; I shall therefore proceed, as I proposed, to point out to your Lordship the ruin which will result to the individuals interested in a continuance of the East India Trade to the Port of London, should it be removed to the Out-ports.

My Lord, this is a part of the subject which calls for more consideration than has hitherto been given to it, as it not only involves the livelihood of a numerous body of the poorer classes of the community, but it goes to nothing short of utter ruin to the individuals engaged in the following branches of trade, as connected with the present system of conducting the Indian commerce, viz.

To a most numerous body of merchants and traders, engaged in the India and China trade, from the Port of London, all of the highest respectability in the commercial world:

To the several persons concerned, employed, and interested, in the building or equipment of East India shipping in the Port of London:

To the numerous class of commanders and officers in the naval service of the East India Company:

To the manufacturers of long ells, resident in the counties of Cornwall, Devon, Dorset, Somerset and Gloucester, added to which are the dyers, setters and calendrers, packers, inspectors of woollen goods, pressers and cloth drawers; all employed in the service of the East India Company.

The first class of individuals, viz. the merchants and traders, has sent three petitions to Parliament, and each of the other classes has also petitioned the Legislature. This is a mode of expostulation to which it cannot be supposed they would have resorted, if the injury they anticipated by opening the trade, were not great, indeed little less than ruinous to them.

The Common Council of the City of London, has also petitioned Parliament, and the inhabitants of the town of Gravesend. It may, my Lord, be considered futile, to quote some of the bodies before mentioned, but it must be allowed, that even individually, they carry much respectability with them, and collectively, it is impossible to point out so large a number of his Majesty's subjects more deserving of the care of the Legislature, in every point of view, than those herein enumerated; and that individual must be a very subfle

reasoner indeed, who can adduce arguments sufficiently convincing, to prove not only the policy, but what is more worthy of attention, the justice of injuring one part of His Majesty's subjects, by depriving them of a trade in which they have embarked their lives and fortunes, and from which this country has in times of distress reaped the most essential benefits, to throw it into the hands of individuals, who at the best are but speculators, indulging themselves in wild theories of fancied and endless riches.

It is not necessary for me to point out to your Lordship, the great injury that will arise to the merchants, by transferring the Indian Trade to the Out-Ports, as I am sure your Lordship must have given so important a part of the subject that consideration which it demands. I shall therefore content myself with entreating your Lordship's attention to a few observations in favor of the other classes, as the causes of the grievances they will suffer, cannot be so evident to your Lordship.

The persons concerned in the building and equipment of East India shipping, are ship builders, shipwrights, ship chandlers, mast makers, block and pump makers, boat builders, ship joiners, ship plumbers, ship painters and glaziers, smiths, copper smiths, anchor smiths, rope makers, sail makers, riggers, lightermen and watermen. The persons carrying on the trades abovementioned, have long been engaged therein, and have constructed and built large docks, manufactories and warehouses, storehouses and other premises, at great expense; they have invested large capitals, and have en gaged numerous workmen.

The establishments so formed have been increased and carried to an extent, which has tended to characterize the Port of London, in its naval establishment, as the most extensive of any in the known world. The removal of the trade to the Out-Ports would consequently prove ruinous to the individuals, whose capitals have been embarked in the formation of the said establishments. The numerous classes of workmen and artizans employed therein, have become attached by long residence to the places where the said trades have been carried on, and connected by marriage with families settled about those establishments. These poor people would be thrown out of employment, and cast upon the world without the smallest chance of finding employment at the Out-Ports, where,