A. D. 1748. 265 



above Li 50,000, and according to others of thofe papers, but Li 30,000. 

 Whereas, fay they, if the whole for home-confumption paid the duty, 

 it would yield much more : which fhews the great lofs to the revenue, 

 only in this one fmgle article, by fmuggling. 



In April this year application was made to parliament by the ex- 

 piring royal African company, for committing the management of their 

 forts and factories, for the prefervation whereof the commons did not 

 feem inclined to truft that company any more with money, to a new 

 company, with a fuitable joint flock : which company they propofed 

 Ihould have ' the licencing and regulating the whole bufinefs of pawn- 

 ' brokers, for preventing their buying or lending money on ftolen 

 * goods, and for reducing their exorbitant rates of 50, 40, and 30, per 

 ' cent per annum, for intereft or premium, to 20 per cent at fartheft.' 

 Which Icheme was to lay the foundation of their propofed joint flock. 



At the fame time the creditors of the royal African company peti- 

 tioned the houfe of commons for having their claim paid out of the 

 fuppofed value of that company's forts on that coafl, now valued at 

 Li 50,000, and propofed to be paid by the new company to the old 

 one. This plaufible project had two different views, viz. hereby the 

 old company would be enabled to pay all their debts, the greateft part 

 whereof was due to themfelves (i. e. to the directors and their friends) 

 and would, over and above, have probably a dividend to make on their 

 then merely nominal capital, on its diilblution. 



2dly, That the propofed new company fliould fpring up out of the 

 ruins of the old one and their creditors, with a few others of their 

 friends, and would, doubtlefs, have made a good intereft on the money 

 they fliould advance for the above parpofes, out of the fcheme for the 

 regulation of pawn-brokers. In fupport of this plaufible fcheme, the 

 old company and their creditors infifted, that Li 50,000 was a very mo- 

 derate valuation of their forts on the African fhores ; not only confider- 

 ing their very great ufefulnefs againfl the treachery and infults of the 

 natives, but likewife for defence againft the frequent encroachments of 

 other European competitors with large joint flocks. That fo far is the 

 objection fo often made from being juft, viz. that if all our forts in 

 Africa were to be demoliflied, excepting Cape-Coaft-Cafllc, and James- 

 Fort in the river Gambia, thofe two forts, together with two or three 

 fliips of war always cruifing thereabout, would be fufficient to protect 

 the trade of the whole coalt ; that there is actually need of more forts 

 than we now have, particularly at Anamaboe and Sierra Leone, and 

 alio higher up on the river Gambia, where the French are ftriving to 

 fupplant us. It is admitted, that fliips of war, jointly with all the forts, 

 are needful ; but, without our forts, that would by no means anfwer 

 our purpofe on fo uncivilizeil a coait ; where, for that reafon, a joint- 

 Itock company is much better calculated for protecfling the commerce 



Vol. III. ■ LI 



