A. D. i68r. 60 1 



planted by India filk, the nioft confiderable part of the Turkey im- 

 portations, and confequently the cloth-trade of England, muft fail. 



II) The conftitution of the Turkey company, as being a regulated 

 one, and not driven by a joint flock, is open and comprehenfive, ad- 

 mitting any that are bred merchants. The fons and apprentices of free- 

 men challenge their freedom by feven years fervice, and others are ad- 

 mitted to be free for L25 if under 27 years of age, and if above that 

 age for L50 ; each freeman to trade for as much as he is able. By 

 luch open trading the company is increafed from 70 perfons, who, 40 

 years ago, wholely drove the trade, to at leaft 500 traders. 



On the other hand, the Eaft-India company's trade is managed by an 

 exclufive joint ftock, which is fo engroflcd, that about twelve perfons 

 have the abfolute management of the whole trade, and about forty per- 

 ions divide the major part of the gains, and alfo appropriate to them- 

 fclves a greater profit in a leparate trade, in mufk, ambergris, &c. and, 

 till of late, in diamonds alfo : neither can they breed up any perfon un- 

 der the notion of an Eafl-India merchant, becaule any one may pur- 

 chafe a fhare of their trade and joint flock for money. 



III) The Turkey company's ftock is really greater than the trade will 

 bear, under their prefent difcouragements and checks from the Eafl- 

 India company ; and if any damage befalls this flock, every particular 

 member bears the lofs of his owrf adventure, with no damage to the 

 public. 



On the other hand, the Eafl-India company having a fixed joint flock 

 of but about £370,000,* they find it more for their advantage to trade 

 with money at intcrefl than to enlarge their flock, and they have there- 

 for borrowed at leail £650,000 on their common feal, at the inconfider 

 able interefl of 3 or 4 per cent, thereby trading with the treafure of the 

 nation, and dividing to themfelves what fums they pleafe, not only out 

 of the profit, but alio out of the principal, as lafl year, w-hen they di- 

 vided £260,000, though at the lame time they owed above L6oo,ooo 

 a interefl. 



One George White, a writer againfl this company, in this fame year, 

 fays, that in the compafs of five years (i 676-1 681) they divided 

 £741,647, and in two months afterwards they doubled their ftock: 

 this, lays he, was in all £1,1 11,647 produced from a capital of £370,000 

 only, by which extravagant dividends, together with above £300,000, 

 for money borrowed at inierefl, with preients to courtiers, and their 

 quarrel with the mogul, they were brought into great difficulties, fo 

 that they, in a fliort time, were forced to flop payment for fome months, 

 yet they recovered a little again : although by feizing many of the mo- 



* How is this aflerlion to be reconciled with the duplication of tlic India company's ftock in the ■ 

 yeai 1676? A. 



Vol. II 4 G 



