1828.] Mr. Huskisson's Colonial Trade Bill, 1825. 265 



The inadequacy, then, of that species of foreign trade which rests 

 upon no other foundation than reciprocal interest, to the attainment up 

 to this point of the only commercial object of all foreign interchange, is 

 capable of existing only (if at all) in the solitary case which the exist- 

 ence of that commerce, from the earliest records of history, demonstrates 

 never yet to have arisen in any country in which civilization had 

 advanced even a single step, and which we may pronounce never will 

 arise with as much certainty as we foretell the rising of the sun on 

 Thursday morning when we witness its sinking to rest on Wednesday 

 night. What would be its inadequacy in a case so barely within the 

 extremest verge of possibility, it would be, for all practical purposes, 

 frivolous to inquire. 



A mere commercial relationship then, unaided by the compulsory 

 agency of dominion, being demonstrated sufficient to secure to one coun- 

 try the produce of another, at a price adequate to replace the cost of 

 production, including the ordinary profits of stock in both countries on 

 the capital employed in effecting it, the value of colonial dominion, as an 

 agency for promoting commercial advantage, must be sought in its power 

 to supply that produce at a lower price than would repay the cost of 

 production, including the profits of stock. Whether such a power have 

 existence, we proceed to examine. 



That there is nothing in colonial trading to induce the capitalists of 

 the mother country to forego a proportion of the ordinary profits of 

 capital for the benefit of the consumers, is a self-evident proposition. 

 The agency then, to be operative at all, must be exercised in restriction 

 on the colonies. Now, as their produce is the object of attainment, it is 

 plain that restriction must be directed to secure to the mother country 

 the monopoly of that produce. This can only be accomplished by con- 

 fining the colonies to the market of the mother country for the disposal 

 of that produce. It may be doubted whether, in colonies of any great 

 extent, this is capable of attainment. An expensive naval and military 

 apparatus may perhaps accomplish it in colonies of small extent ; and it 

 is obvious that, whether large or small, if it be to the interest of the 

 colonies to dispose of their produce to other countries than the parent 

 country, and it is the interest of those countries to become its purchasers, 

 the attempt at evasion will assuredly be made. We have seen that the 

 policy of governments has hitherto been rather to treat colonies as mar- 

 kets for the sale of their manufacturer s productions, than as those in 

 which consumers were enabled to purchase the objects of their desires. In 

 the spirit of this policy, the general tenor of their restrictions has been 

 to monopolize to the home country the supplying of the colonial market. 

 But the whole history of these restrictions sufficiently demonstrates the 

 utter incapacity of artificial restraint to prevent men from following the 

 dictates of self-interest, in securing to themselves the most profitable 

 return for their industry. Notwithstanding the celebrated Act of 1663^ 

 which restricted the importation into the British plantations of every 

 commodity of the growth, production, or manufacture of Europe, but 

 such as were laden and put on board in England, Wales, or Berwick- 

 upon-Tweed, Lord Sheffield states [^Observations on American Com- 

 merce] " that when the colonists found they could import cheaper from 

 other countries than from England, they had very little difficulty in 

 evading our restrictions ;" and it is very certain that all the guarda-costas 

 of vSpain could not prevent the importation into her colonies of the pro- 



M. M. New Series. VOL. V. No. 27. 2 M 



