WEALTH OF NATIONS. 237 



part of his capital under his eye and controul, and thus 

 to sell at home, just as Holland became a great em- 

 porium of all articles, while she was the carrier of the 

 world. 



The general soundness of Dr. Smith's views upon 

 this important subject has never been questioned by 

 persons of good authority, unless upon the questions 

 connected with the bounty. Some writers, who are in 

 general the advocates of free trade, have considered 

 the benefits conferred by the bounty upon agriculture, 

 and through agriculture upon the whole industry of 

 the community, to be sufficiently important to counter- 

 balance the arguments against so great a deviation 

 from all sound principle as the payment of a portion 

 out of the national capital, for the purpose of drawing 

 more of this capital into one line of employment than 

 would otherwise seek that line. They have also con- 

 sidered that a reduction in the price of agricultural 

 produce is the ultimate effect of this system. Dr. 

 Anderson, the author of the true Theory of Kent, (as 

 far back as 1777,) and Mr. Malthus hold these opinions. 

 Others, again, who entirely agree in Dr. Smith's opinion, 

 dispute the reasons by which he supports it. Thus 

 Professor Maculloch has shown that there is a fallacy 

 in the assumption of the real value of corn being un- 

 alterable as Dr. Smith supposes, (Corn Laws, ' Encyclo- 

 paedia Brit.' VII. 347.) And Mr. Homer, in a most 

 able paper in the 'Edinburgh Review' (V. 199), shows 

 that Dr. Smith arrives at the conclusion of the enhance- 

 ment of price in the home market by a wrong route, 

 the enhancement being by him regarded as the direct 

 and inevitable effect of the bounty, and kept separate, 

 from its effect in extending the foreign demand, whereas 

 Mr. Homer shows, I think very clearly, that the exten- 

 sion is the direct and main cause of the enhancement, 

 and that the bounty only operates incidentally in this 

 way. It is also to be observed that no reference is 

 made to the operation of the bounty upon the foreign 



