WEALTH OF NATIONS. 175 



shire to trade with the other parts of England alone. 

 But we have even gone further and prohibited certain 

 of our colonies from trading with some of our other 

 colonies, as if Lancashire and Devonshire should be 

 obliged to trade with Middlesex alone. However, it 

 must be allowed, that Dr. Smith is wholly in error when 

 he regards the colonial trade and agriculture as foreign, 

 and the capital invested in them as invested in remote 

 foreign trade, round-about foreign trade, and carry- 

 ing trade. The colonies are part of the empire; their 

 people are its citizens and subjects; the trade with the 

 colonies is as much a home trade, as much replaces 

 British capital, and puts in motion two classes of British 

 labourers, as the trade between two provinces of the 

 mother country. Indeed it resembles most nearly the 

 commerce between the country and the towns in any 

 given state, the traffic of the producers with the con- 

 sumers, of the farmers with the manufacturers, of all 

 commerce the most gainful. It is also certain, that he 

 has overlooked another and a most material consider- 

 ation. The capital invested in foreign agriculture, where 

 the capitalist and his family reside on their property or 

 their farms, remains abroad, both stock and profits. 

 The capital invested in colonial agriculture returns its 

 profits almost immediately to support families residing 

 in the mother country. These profits, moreover, can be 

 subjected to the taxation of the State with a view to 

 support its revenue. 



The benefits of the colonial trade, and even its mono- 

 poly, in contributing to the naval resources of the State, 

 have been freely admitted by Dr. Smith, as has already 

 been seen. But one important consideration he has wholly 



