Foreign Commerce. 59 
domestic labour. As illustrations of these 
two different modes of thinking, we quote 
the opimions of Mr. Spence, and those of the 
critic who replies to him in the Edinburgh 
Review. 
Mr. Spence pronounces it absurd to consider 
any branch of our commerce as deriving im- 
portance from the duties which are levied 
on it. All such duties, according to him, are 
finally paid by the consumers of the articles 
on which they are laid, and these consumers 
are equally able to pay the sums they 
advance, whether they consume such articles 
or not. If the present consumers of tea and 
wine, for example, were to drink nothing but 
water, they would possess not only the same, 
but a considerably greater, power of contri- 
buting taxes for the exigencies of the state. 
To this the reviewer replies, that the appe- 
tite which men have for the luxuries on which 
the taxes are laid, is the sole cause of the pro- 
duction both of the luxuries themselves, and 
of the taxes which they bear: and, therefore, 
if the incitement is withheld, industry and 
production must infallibly languish. That it 
is not enough for the Chancellor of the Exche- 
quer to recommend to the people to leave off 
tea and wine, that they may be better able to 
H2 
