Political Economy. 149 
snerce you further state « that the lands of America stand partu 
« cularly in need of capitaiy — I believe they do ; and therefore a 
foreign trade, diverting capital from agriculture, might, in our 
country, with some plausibility be objected to on that ground. 
On the other hand,-«a foreign trade, bringing foreign capital 
into the country, must be the more beneficial, for the same reason. 
Which is the case ? has not the foreign trade of America, for 
a long time, been carried on almost exclusively, with British 
-funds ? and was not a great proportion of it carried on, with Bri- 
tish funds, down to the very moment of its late interruption ? 
The great influx of foreign capital, in consequence of foreign 
trade, and of the funding system, so frequently, and so improper- 
ly found fault with, is, unquestionably, one of the most powerful 
causes of the unexampled progress which agriculture, the arts, 
and manufactures, have made in this country during the short 
space of a century and a half— for it has not been longer settled. 
Foreign trade, and the funding system, are the very hot beds^ in 
which they have so surprisingly thriven. 
If there were no other arguments in favour of an unrestrain- 
ed, commercial intercourse between nations, a view of the benefits 
derived from the influx of capital on the one side, and from the 
employment of capital, on the other, would alone be sufficient to 
establish firmly the doctrine of its superior use; illness. 
Since capital consists, in the accumulated, and consolidated re- 
sults of labour, during a lapse of ages of industry ; it surely fol- 
lows, that a young nation, secluding itself, and avoiding all inter- 
course with foreign nations, has to become oUP before it can ac- 
quire a capital of its own, and enjoy the incalculable advantages it 
procures.* A young nation, on the contrary, conimimicating free- 
ly with nations of long standing, will participate largely of the ad- 
vantages they derive from the labours of their ancestors. 
To place this in a still stronger light— suppose a family, pos- 
sessing absolutely nothing, should arrive and settle on a fruitful 
spot, and be left there to themselves. They will first have to 
scratch the ground, to raise the grain wherewith to satisfy their 
hunger, and, if possible, the surplus grain, wherewith to procure 
* I cannot see this. Is the commerce between Pliiladelphia and 
Orleans, good for nothing, until they become foreign countries in respect of 
each other ? Is it the worse, because it requires no navy at each place to be 
i«ady for mutual hostilities, whenever mercantile jealousy shall excite 
^hem? To C.. 
