And Mr Tucker admits, that the exports to India and China never produced a profit generally, or for a continuance. The trade was resorted to, and persevered in, upon a variety of mixed considerations, partly to supply a remittance to the • East, where, until lately, we required funds for the purchase of return cargoes; partly to supply the Chinese and our Indian subjects with articles which they could not obtain through other channels, while the exclusive trade was vested in the Company; partly to occupy tonnage, which would otherwise have been unproductive; but chiefly to benefit the manufacturing and other interests of this country, by introducing and circulating our fabrics, and the products of our mines, throughout the wide regions which were accessible to our enterprise. (191.) But the trade from India, excluding the tea trade, does not seem to have been more productive than the trade to India. Mr Tucker acknowledges that it has long been matter of doubt whether the Company's trade from India has been attended with a 'profit.' (192.) Mr Rickards, however, shows that there is really no doubt whatever on the subject, and that it has always been attended with a heavy loss. Much,' says he, has been ⚫ said and written, on the extravagant waste and heedless management of joint stock companies. The accounts now examined show the total absence of that feeling of private interest, which serves to animate and support individuals in their undertakings. A gross profit of 100 per cent. on the sale of the Com'pany's imports is unable to cover the charges and losses sustained in bringing these goods to the London market. What might not skill and economy in private merchants have realized, with only one half of that gross profit on the teas, nankeens, silk, and piece-goods which have chiefly entered into the Company's sales? That individuals might have prospered with only half that profit which leaves the Company overwhelmed with debt, is not the only part of this question that ought to be considered. If the goods thus brought to market are so • much dearer than they would otherwise be, the consumption, and, consequently, the trade of the country, must be proportionally restricted. Without a check on the present system, there is no hope that, under any modification of the Company's trade, which has yet been suggested, they will be able to pay their dividends, except by extraneous aid from the ' revenues of India, or by loans.'-(Mr Rickards's Speeches, p. 216.) 6 6 It was not to be expected that a trade carried on, as Mr Tucker states, partly to gratify the Chinese and Hindoos, part ly to provide employment for ships that would otherwise have been lying idle, and partly for the patriotic purpose of forcing an additional market for the products of British industry, should be prosecuted to any considerable extent. And the truth is, however much it may be at variance with the popular ideas respecting the magnitude and importance of the trade with India, that until 1815, it was hardly of as much importance as the trade with Guernsey and the Isle of Man. It appears from papers laid before the House of Commons, that the aggregate value of all sorts of merchandize exported from this country to India, exclusive of the exports to China, did not amount, previously to the renewal of the charter in 1813, to one million a year! and the shipping employed, both in the out and home voyages, did not amount to 40,000 tons. Such was the pitiful extent of our commerce with a country filled with 100 millions of industrious inhabitants: and even this stunted and petty trade was not productive of advantage, but of loss to those by whom it was carried on. Can any more convincing proof be required of the paralyzing effects of monopoly, of its tendency to choke up what would otherwise be the most productive channels of commerce, and to fetter and restrict the mutually beneficial intercourse that would otherwise take place among nations? Such was the state of the traffic between India and England when the proposal for renewing the Company's charter came to be discussed in 1813. It is difficult to form any clear idea of the grounds on which the Company resisted the opening of the trade to Hindostan. That trade had never been productive of the smallest profit to them; but on the contrary, it had occasioned them a loss of several millions. Under these circumstances it might have been supposed that they would gladly have availed themselves of the first opportunity of getting rid of so unprosperous a concern. But instead of this, they struggled as hard for the monopoly as if it had really been a means of putting large sums into their pockets. And unfortunately for their own, as well as the public interests, though they had not influence enough to get private traders entirely excluded from India, they succeeded in getting them subjected to many oppressive and vexatious restrictions. It was enacted, for example, that no individual should be allowed to go out to India, either to reside permanently, or for the casual purpose of a commercial voyage, without the Company's permission-a permission which is not always obtained when asked for, and which is uniformly given as a matter of special favour. This restriction seems the more inexpedient and useless, as foreigners are, in most instances, allowed to repair at pleasure, and without a single question being put to them, to any part of the British Indian dominions. But this was not the only restriction of which the private traders had to complain. They were not allowed to fit out vessels of less than 350 tons burden; and they were only permitted to carry on a direct traffic with the Presidencies of Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta, and the port of Penang; being entirely excluded, unless by the express permission of the Company, or the Board of Controul, from the internal or carrying trade of India, and from the China trade. And yet, in despite of all these disadvantages and drawbacks, and in despite too of the sinister auguries indulged in by most of the Company's servants, such is the superior force and energy of individual enterprise, as compared with dull, sluggish monopoly, that the private traders have nearly beat the East India Company out of the field, and have more than quintupled our exports to India. In the Report of the Committee of the House of Lords on the Foreign Trade of the country, printed in May 1821, it is stated, that The greatly increased consumption of British goods in the East, since the commencement of the free trade, cannot be accounted for by the demand of European residents, the number of whom does not materially vary; and it appears to have been much the greatest in articles calculated for the general use of the natives: That of the cotton manufactures of this country alone is stated, since the first opening of the trade, to have been augmented from four to five fold (it has now been augmented in a tenfold proportion.) The value of the merchandise exported from Great Britain to India, which amounted in 1814 to 870,177., amounted in 1819 to 3,052,7417.; and although the market appears then to have been so far overstocked as to occasion a diminution of nearly one half in the exports of the following year, that diminution appears to have taken place more in the articles intended for the consumption of the Europeans than of natives; and the trade is now stated to the Committee, by the best informed persons, to be reviving. When the amount of population, and the extent of the country over which the consumption of these articles is spread, are considered, it is obvious that any facility which can, consistently with the political interests and security of the Company's dominions, be given to the private trader, for the distribution of his exports, by increasing the number of ports at which he may have the option of touching in pursuit of a 6 *This restriction has since been modified. market, cannot fail to promote a more ready and extensive • demand.' Mr Moreau gives the following statement of the total value of the merchandise exported by the free traders from Great Britain to India in the following years, viz. L.1,650,338 L. 2,308,681 L. 2,836,007 L. 2,867,056 And the exports for the last three years have, we understand, been considerably greater. But while the private trader was thus, in despite of the most formidable obstacles, opening new and extensive markets for the sale of British goods, the exports by the East India Company have been reduced to a mere trifle. The produce of the Company's sales of British goods in India, which must of course, unless the trade has been an extremely losing one, greatly exceed the value of the exports, is stated by Mr Tucker to have been as follows. Under these circumstances, it does appear to us that a negociation might be advantageously entered into with the East India Company, for the purpose of procuring the emancipation of the trade with India from the existing restrictions. We cannot imagine for a moment that the Company would evince any unreasonable tenaciousness of privileges which, while they are of no real advantage to them, are productive of great public injury. They would most certainly be very great gainers by leaving the commerce of India to be conducted wholly by private traders; and confining themselves exclusively to the government and administration of the country. And were this done, were the nuisance of commercial monopoly completely put down, restraints and shackles of every sort abolished, and the innumerable markets of India opened to the unrestricted competition of the merchants of Great Britain, it is impossible to doubt that a vast addition would be made to the commerce now carried on between the two countries. India, as well as England, would benefit by the change: And the East India Company would gain by the new spirit of enterprise which the freedom of commerce would do much to generate among their subjects. A separation between the sovereign power and the commercial monopoly of the East India Company would not only promote their pecuniary interests, and the commerce of the empire, but it is indispensably necessary for the sake of what there can be no doubt the Company have always had at heart, the good government of the people of India. A Company which carries a sword in the one hand, and a ledger in the other—which maintains armies and retails tea, is a contradiction; and if it traded with success, would be a prodigy. The agents of such a body stand on a very different footing from private traders. A private adventurer is compelled to be courteous; he must accommodate himself to the habits and wishes of those with whom he deals; and must labour to conciliate their favour and esteem. Ármed with no extrinsic powers, supported by no imposing squadrons, and appearing amongst them for purely commercial purposes, he excites neither jealousy nor apprehension; while the advantages derived from his intercourse secure him a kind and hospitable reception. Particular acts of violence and aggression have doubtless been sometimes committed by private traders; but such acts have been, and must necessarily continue to be, of very rare occurrence. Each private trader is a guarantee for the peaceable conduct of every other private trader. It is for the interest of the whole that their commercial pursuits should not be interrupted by the violence or misconduct of individuals; and they never fail to do all in their power to repress the latter. But it is obvious. that the servants of a great joint-stock association, like the East India Company, must come into the market under the influence of very different feelings and interests. Appearing in the double and irreconcileable character of soldiers and merchants, they feel themselves relieved from the necessity of treating the natives in a kind and conciliatory manner. Conscious of their power, they must be more than men if they do not occasionally place their confidence in force rather than in address. Instead of rising to wealth by slow degrees, and by the fair and honest exercise of their industry, the agents of monopolists have too commonly resorted to more compendious processes; and what is worse, they never fail to identify their own arbitrary and unjustifiable proceedings with the honour and interest of the nation to which they belong; and pervert the power placed in their hands to insure the success of their schemes. Their mercantile is uniformly sunk in their military character; and, with various capacity and fluctuating |