Ai 
 
 a 1 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 
 
 1 i 
 
 3! 
 
 8! 
 7! 
 1 ! 
 
 The ^nglishinan f s Letters Rel- 
 ative to the Trade Between Great 
 II Britain and the '\ast-Indies
 
 
 
 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 AT LOS ANGELES
 
 THE 
 
 ENGLISHMAN'S LETTERS 
 
 RELATIVE TO 
 
 THE TRADE BETWEEN 
 
 GREAT BRITAIN 
 
 AND 
 
 THE EAST-INDIES. 
 
 IN WHICH 
 
 THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS OF THE EAST-INDIA COMPANY, 
 
 AND 
 
 THE RIGHTS OF THE PRIVATE MERCHANTS, 
 
 UNDER THE ACT QF 1793, 
 
 ARE DISCUSSED. 
 
 LON'DON: 
 
 D BY J. WRIGHT, DFNM A RK-CO U RT, STRAND, 
 
 AND SOI, D BY 
 
 J. STOCKDALE, I'lCC ADILLY. 
 1802.
 
 V 
 
 } Ap-7*. 
 
 13(33- 
 
 EAST INDIA PRIVATE TRADE. 
 
 \ - 
 
 1%. 
 
 LETTER I. 
 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 IT is not likely that you should be inattentive, either 
 , to the critical situation of your affairs at this important 
 time, or to the conduct of your Court of Directors in 
 their management of them. There is, however* an 
 inactivity in a body constituted as ours is (for I am 
 alfo a Proprietor of India Stock) which requires to be 
 ilimulated occasionally ; or else there is an overweening 
 confidence in our Directors that it is equally necessary 
 to guard against. I shall therefore dedicate a few obser- 
 vations to you, from time to time, in hopes that they 
 may be found not altogether unworthy of your notice. 
 
 It is a difficult, as well as a delicate point, to adjust 
 precisely the balance of interference between the con- 
 stituent and the constituted body 3 if it preponderate 
 with the former, it may lead to tumult and confusion ; 
 if with the latter, it is apt to degenerate into contempt 
 of authority, and impatience of control. I think it may 
 be safely asserted, and will be generally assented to, that 
 of late the Proprietors have been the ascending scale ; 
 that a sort of complaisant confidence has been placed 
 in the Directors, which, in addition to their political 
 and patronal consequence, has given them greater 
 weight than is either requisite or proper. The time 
 
 ha*
 
 has been, and that not long ago, when the influence of the 
 Proprietors was much greater than it is at present j and 
 it is much to their credit to aver/ that it has never been 
 exerted but on important occasions, and always with 
 great benefit to their affairs. If the doctrine of confi- 
 
 O 
 
 dence, which has been of late strenuously supported, 
 had been adopted in the case of shipping, we should 
 have had a hundred and fifty thousand pounds a year 
 more at least to pay for freight than we have at pre- 
 sent j if it had been adopted in the case of recruits, we 
 should have had to pay for the establishment of a 
 depot in the Isle of Wight, of many thousand pounds 
 a year j if it had been implicitly adopted in the case of 
 increasing our capital, we should have had two millions 
 added to our stock, for no other purpose than to please 
 the Directors, who wanted to please the Minister ; and 
 the same influence, if it had not been wisely checked, 
 would have induced this Company, in the year 1796, 
 to have volunteered an advance of two millions to Go- 
 vernment, without interest, for the whole term of our 
 Charter j and which we now find we have so much oc- 
 casion for in the course of our own affairs. 
 
 With these instances fresh in our memory, and many 
 others which might be adduced, I hope we shall not, from 
 a false delicacy, trust implicitly to our Directors in the 
 business of Private Trade, which is now in discussion, 
 and agitates- and heats the minds of all who attack or 
 defend it. I am aware that it is a popular ground 
 for the Directors to take, and they, too, are aware 
 of their advantage. They have already boasted of their 
 independent principles, and of their pure integrity in 
 their support of the Company's Chartered Rights ; and 
 
 they
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 they have even accused their opponents of base in- 
 gratitude to that Company, by whose bounty they have 
 been fed. Accusation is neither the best mode of sup- 
 porting an argument, nor the bestproof of the truth of it; 
 on the contrary, it is a symptom of weakness, rather than 
 of strength, and implies a design in the person who has 
 recourse to it, to engage the passions, because he despairs 
 of convincing the understanding. But whoever intends 
 to wield this weapon would do well to consider that 
 it is a two-edged sword, and cuts both ways. 
 
 In answer to the accusation, which has been made in 
 the spirit of party, and not of truth, it is a sufficient re- 
 futation of it to observe, that the Company's Chartered 
 Rights are neither infringed nor endangered ; that if a 
 general and national benefit can be proved to be ob- 
 structed by partial privileges, those privileges must give 
 way, and that those who are, or have been, servants 
 of the Company, consult the interest of that Company 
 better by endeavouring to remove the shackles of Private 
 Trade, than those who wish to impose them ; that, 
 therefore, if there be any ingratitude in taking a part 
 in this important question, the crime of it is as charge- 
 able on those who wish to suppress, as on those who wish 
 to support the Private Trade ; for the imputation, if it 
 means any thing but an outcry, means that it is injurious 
 to the Company to encourage this trade ; on the other 
 hand, those who engage in its support contend, that it 
 is a benefit both to the Company and the nation. 
 
 Since, however, some of the Directors in Parlia- 
 ment have thought it would aid their cause to boast of 
 their motives, and the disinterestedness of their actions, 
 and to impeach the conduct of their opponents, they 
 
 B 2 could
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 eould not complain, if it provoked an inquiry into the 
 validity of their vaunted claim. But it is not my in- 
 tention to imitate an example I disapprove, or to 
 change the argument and divert the mind from prin- 
 ciples to persons. 
 
 My plan, in the letters which I shall take the liberty 
 of addressing to you in future, is to inquire dispassion- 
 ately into the nature of the Private Trade ; to trace it 
 from its origin to the present time j to consider its con- 
 sequences both in India and England ; to examine whe- 
 ther the regulations and restraints which the Court of 
 Directors formed and imposed upon it, from time to 
 time, were wise and necessary, or injudicious and im- 
 politic ; to take a view of the situation of the trade of 
 foreign nations, and to investigate the rights, and privi- 
 leges, and interest of our own Company. In a word, I 
 mean to enter into so full a discussion of this subject of 
 Private Trade, as shall bring the whole of it fairly be- 
 fore you, and enable you, if my ability (with the as- 
 sistance of my friends) prove equal to my intention, to 
 judge of its good or ill effects on your affairs, and whe- 
 ther you should join with your Directors in suppressing 
 it, or comply with the petition of the merchants in en- 
 couraging it on a wise and liberal scale. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN 
 Jw/< y. 1802. 
 
 LETTER
 
 LETTER II. 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 ijEFORE I enter upon the subject of this day's ad- 
 dress, I beg to be indulged with a few words more on 
 the doctrine of confidence. It is only to lay before you 
 what pafied at the General Court on the 28th of May 
 laft, relative to the unanimity of the Directors on that 
 occasion, and to leave it to your own reflection whether 
 that will increase your confidence in the executive body. 
 At that meeting the Directors in general seemed im- 
 pressed with the idea, that the declaration of their una- 
 nimity was to act as magic on the Court, and to silence 
 all opposition : one honourable Director said, " it was 
 <c the most extraordinary proceeding he ever witnessed 
 " in that Court, for forty-three individual Proprietors, 
 " most of them engaged in private trade, to set up 
 " their opinions against the judgment of the Directors. 
 " Let the Proprietors recollect the weight of the word 
 " unanimity-, the twenty-four Directors were unanimous" 
 (Woodfall's Reports) ; and afterwards, that the thirty 
 Directors were of one opinion. Several other Direc- 
 tors expressed sentiments of the same tendency, and 
 clearly intimated that they considered themselves as a 
 band of 'thirty unanimous Directors ! six of whom, to be 
 sure, were Ex for a few months in rotation, in order 
 to satisfy the form of the law by which the Company's 
 charter is held. Many Proprietors were fturdy enough 
 to doubt this boasted unanimity ; and they were well 
 founded in their suspicions , for when the subject came 
 soon afterwards into the House of Commons (nth 
 June, 1 80 1,) Mr. Dundas, speaking to it, said, " What 
 
 63 "do
 
 . 
 
 " do you tell m of your unanimity ? Me, who have 
 " read all your written opinions : this may do very well 
 cc for the Court of Proprietors ; but I know you were 
 cc NOT unanimous ; I know that the highest authority 
 t( among you, your Chairman, is of an opinion diame- 
 /v " trically oppofite to that of the majority." [Vide 
 " Mr. Impey's Speech in General Court.] And this was 
 very true j for the Chairman was shortly after this de- 
 bate driven, I may say, from his seat for this very op- 
 position, and for nothing else. Having stated these ex- 
 traordinary facts, which are too well founded to be con- 
 troverted, I leave them to your consideration without a 
 comment. 
 
 I shall now, in pursuance of the plan I proposed in 
 my letter of the 9th instant, proceed to inquire into the 
 nature and origin of the Private Trade of India; and in 
 doing this I must trespass on your patience, by taking 
 a short review of the commerce of India at an antece- 
 dent period. 
 
 It is well known that, by the wise policy of the Mo- 
 gul emperors, merchants from all parts of the world 
 were encouraged to come into their dominions for the 
 purpose of trade, and that they brought with them little 
 else than ready money or bills to purchase the commo- 
 dities of India. This encouragement was particularly 
 necessary in a country which had no mines of gold or 
 silver of its own, and depended for its wealth on the 
 influx of specie brought by the merchants to pay for its 
 manufactures. They carried this system of indulgence 
 to commerce so far as to permit several European na- 
 tions to establish factories in India, under the authority 
 of a grant, called a frmaun. In Bengal there were 
 
 factories
 
 ( 7 ) 
 
 factories belonging to the Portuguese, the Danes> . the 
 Dutch, the French, and the English ; and the agents 
 of these factories purchased from the native merchants 
 the various sorts of articles which were required for the 
 European markets. 
 
 When this trade was first established, after the dis- 
 covery of the passage of the Cape of Good Hope, it 
 was carried on by companies of different European na- 
 tions, not because monopoly ever was considered the 
 most favourable mode of commerce, but on account of 
 the danger, risk, and expcnce, which attended the trade 
 at those early periods, and which were more than pri- 
 vate individuals could incur, or durst venture. At one 
 time two companies were formed in England, which 
 afterwards became united, and were granted the exclu- 
 sive privilege of trading to India. 
 
 The trade of that country lay open, as has been ob- 
 served, to the merchants of every nation, whether they 
 came by sea or land, and the native merchant or manu- 
 facturer was at free liberty to sell his goods to whom he 
 pleased. Thus the competition of purchasers in India 
 encouraged its manufactures and agriculture, and in- 
 creased the stock of wealth in the country to so prodi- 
 gious a degree, that when the English Company became 
 'the sovereigns of it, they thought it an inexhaustible 
 mine, and ordered, in the year 1768 (vide General 
 Letter, iitb January, 1768,) 500,000!. to be sent 
 home in specie ; and, after remitting supplies to China 
 and their other settlements, to reserve a million in the 
 treasury at Bengal. But, alas! those wise Directors ^~ 
 were soon wakened from this golden dream, as we 
 shall see hereafter. 
 
 64 In
 
 ( 8 ) 
 
 In the year 1765, the grant of the Dew finny was 
 made to the Company, and they became, in fact, from 
 that rime, the sovereign of Bengal, Bahar, and Orissa ; 
 and here I beg to mark the era when their change of 
 situation should have made a change of councils. So- 
 vereign and merchant are two distinct characters, which 
 in my humble opinion have never been thoroughly un- 
 derstood by the Court of Directors, or at least they 
 have never acted as if they had sufficiently discriminated 
 them. Before they were possessed of the Dewanny, 
 and whilst they acted like all other merchants in India, 
 they provided their investments for Europe by means of 
 specie, and the produce of some few articles which were 
 sent from England, and by money advanced to them by 
 their servants in India, and free merchants, the pro-r 
 duce of their industry, for which they gave them bills 
 of exchange at 2s. 6d. the current rupee, payable in 
 England. The Company granted these bills for two 
 substantial reasons, both useful to themselves : first, to 
 supply their own deficiency of means to provide their 
 investment ; and secondly, to prevent this money going 
 x into the hands of foreign companies. 
 
 This is a very remarkable circumstance, and should 
 be particularly noticed; for to this source may be traced 
 the origin of what was denounced Clandestine Trade ; and 
 has been since changed into Private Trade. The ser- 
 vants of the company, civil and military, and the free 
 merchants, had no means of remitting the fortunes 
 they had acquired, and reaping the fruits of their in- 
 dustry, but through the Company's treasury, or that of 
 some foreign company ; and if they had been denied 
 both those means, they must have remained in India all 
 
 their
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 their lives in possession of fortunes they could neither 
 enjoy themselves, nor bequeath to their friends in Eng- 
 land. Such a state of banishment no masters had a 
 right to impose after their servants had entered their 
 service without its forming a condition of it ; and if they 
 were to commit such an aft of injustice, they must be 
 aware it would be evaded. The fact proved to be so 
 with the English East India Company ; their Directors 
 did commit this aft of injustice ; it was evaded by every 
 servant they ever had ; they knew it, they were implored 
 to redress the injury, and they promised to do it, but 
 they never did ; many of those very servants became 
 Directors, joined in the same measures, and I believe I 
 should not go too far if I were to add that some at this 
 very day are reprobating what they themselves from 
 necessity had practised. 
 
 No sooner had the Company become possessed of the 
 Dewanny, than they directed that no bills of exchange V 
 should be granted, or money received for certificates, 
 unless in cases of absolute exigency, and that the rate of 
 exchange should be lowered to 2s. jd. and 2s. id. the V 
 current rupee (vide General Later, ijtb May, 1766,) 
 and in January 1768, they ordered the surplus reve- 
 nue to be employed in providing their investment, but 
 they said, <c as they could not expect so sudden an ex- 
 rc tension of it, they had come to the resolution to have 
 fc 500,000!. brought home in specie by the return of 
 f( the ships then under dispatch." By such severe re- 
 gulations and restrictions as those were the servants and 
 the free merchants for ced, (for I contend no man would v 
 consent to the banishment of remaining in India all 
 his life) to seek other means of remitting their fortunes 
 
 to
 
 to England. The means which presented themselves 
 were foreign companies, or private traders of foreign 
 countries, the French, the Dutch, the Danes, the Im- 
 perialists, the Portuguese ; and whether these compa- 
 nies or traders provided goods on their own account, 
 with the English money paid into their hands for bills 
 on Europe, or whether goods were shipped on account 
 of the individuals in their ships, or through the privi- 
 lege of the Captains and Officers of English ships, all 
 the purchases made by these advances were clandestine 
 trade j for these means were all equally forbidden. 
 This was the origin of what is now called Private Trade, 
 that is, in other words, all the trade with British capi- 
 tal which the Company did not import, or allow to be 
 imported into England, but which, for the most part, 
 does now come here with great advantage to the Com- 
 pany and the public. In my next I shall consider its 
 tendency and effects, the impolicy of the measures 
 which created it, and the advantage or disadvantage to 
 the Nation and the Company. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN. 
 London, January 16, 1802. 
 
 LETTER 111. 
 
 To the Proprietors of East Lulin Stock. 
 
 IN my letter of the i6th instant, I mewed that it was 
 the wise and enlightened policy of the Emperors of In- 
 dia to give every possible facility to its trade, and every 
 encouragement to its merchants, by which its wealth, 
 its manufactures, and its agriculture were promoted to 
 the highest degree. It is superfluous to remark, that 
 
 a country
 
 ( II ) 
 
 a country which had no mines of its own, must have 
 been enriched by the produce of the soil and the manu- 
 factures of its inhabitants ; it was, therefore, highly ne- 
 cessary in the English East India Company, when they 
 became sovereigns, to follow, as far as circumstances 
 would admit, the wise example of their predecessors. 
 Unfortunately for them, the Company came into pos- 
 session of these kingdoms, when, from many concurrent 
 causes, they were falling into decay, and many sources 
 from which money flowed into them were dried up. 
 This should have excited them the more to revive the 
 languid spirit of commerce ; to animate the labourer 
 and the manufacturer to fresh exertions of industry, and 
 to increase the productive labour of the country* 
 Whatever might be the cause, a different spirit certainly 
 prevailed in the councils of the Directors of those days; 
 for, instead of opening new channels of wealth, they 
 stopped that by which their own used to flow, and they 
 stopped another of foreign Companies to a certain de- 
 gree, namely, to the amount of those remittances which 
 they forbid to be made through their own treasury. 
 They would have gone much further, if their orders 
 could have been obeyed, and have had 500,000!. sent 
 home in specie, besides an enormous supply to China 
 and their settlements in India. 
 
 In four years after they became sovereigns of the ; 
 country, all these visionary schemes vanished. Com- v 
 merce decayed, the revenues failed, and distress besieg- 
 ed them on every side. Their plan of commerce in 
 particular was so bad, that, in the year 1769, one of their 
 oldest servants, at that time resident at the Durbar, the 
 ancient capital and centre of Bengal, writes thus 
 
 ^ I well
 
 " I well remember this country when trade was free, and 
 t the flourishing statt it was then in ; with concern I 
 " now see its present ruinous condition, which I am con- 
 <c vinced is greatly swing to the monopoly that has been 
 tf made of late years, in the Company's name, of almost all 
 *' the manufactures in the country. Let the trade be made 
 "free, and this fine country will soon recover itself, the 
 f( revenues increase, and the Company procure as large an 
 <c investment as they can spare money to purchase ; and 
 " these purchases will prove a benefit to the country, in- 
 <( stead of tending to its ruin, as they now do to demon- 
 <( straiten." (Mr. Becher's letter to the Governor, 
 
 7th May, 1769.) These sentiments of Mr. Be- 
 
 cher, the -Resident at the Durbar, were confirmed by 
 the Select Committee, to whom they were referred ; 
 and the Company's records from that time teem with 
 instances of the mismanagement of the trade of India, 
 At one time the Company would have native agents at 
 their factories, called Gomastahs ; at another time Py- 
 kars ; at another, contractors, called Dadncy merchants; 
 in short, they were constantly fluctuating in their plans 
 of commerce, and are not yet agreed upon them. One 
 tiling, however, is plain, that in all their systems the 
 \J spirit of monopoly prevailed, and the freedom of trade, 
 which was so much encouraged in the Mogul Govern- 
 ment, was obstructed and fettered by the regulations 
 and restrictions of the Court of Directors. 
 
 Having resolved to increafe their inveftment to a 
 great extent, and to appropriate a part of the surplus 
 of their territorial revenue to this purpose, the Direc- 
 tors would not receive any money from individuals, ei- 
 ther in or out of their service ; and at the same time 
 
 that
 
 ( 13 ) 
 
 chat they shut the door of remittance to their servants 
 and free merchants, they imposed the severest penalties 
 on any one who should remit their fortunes through 
 any foreign channel. The French were now re-esta- 
 blished in their factories after the last treaty of peace at 
 Paris (in 1763) ; the Dutch and Danes had not been 
 disturbed in theirs, and all these nations were holding 
 out every temptation in their power to induce the En- 
 glish to remit their fortunes through their treasuries. 
 The sums which they> received from the English for re- 
 mittance enabled the foreign nations to purchase goods 
 for their investments, and prevented their sending spe- 
 cie from Europe to that amount. This, as I have be- 
 fore stated, constituted what the Directors call Clan- 
 deftine Trade ; and what people in England, from not 
 knowing the nature of it, conceived to be a trade pur- 
 loined, as it were, from the Company's investment, and 
 smuggled into Europe, to the detriment of their exclu- 
 sive privileges ; but it will be seen, from this description 
 of it, and the fact is, it only enabled foreigners to 
 purchase those articles in India, to which they had, and 
 still have, the same right as the English Company, 
 namely, the right of a Firmaun, with a British capital 
 furnished on the spot, instead of foreigners sending so 
 much specie from Europe. As far as it tended to en- 
 courage the manufactures in India it was of service to 
 the Company in the character of Sovereigns, by af- 
 fording their subjc&s the means of paying the revenue ; 
 and in fact it did them no harm as merchants, for the 
 demand of the markets in Europe was great enough to 
 take off all the goods which were imported from India 
 by all the European Companies, The principal injury 
 
 it
 
 it did them was, the preventing of so much specie 
 coming into India j this they either did not know, or 
 did not regard, for all their ideas were engrossed about 
 increase of investment. But be the effect what it 
 might, they owed it all to their own impolicy and in- 
 justice j and if they had understood their true interest 
 at that time a whit better than they do at this, they 
 might, in their collective wisdom, then have devised 
 means for remitting those private fortunes through 
 their own cash ; by so doing they would have increased 
 the productive labour of their subjects in India, pre- 
 vented foreigners from benefitting by thofe remittances, 
 and forced them to fend specie to India, of which the 
 Directors were at this time draining it through every 
 floodgate they could open. 
 
 Let us now consider the effects of this trade in India 
 and Europe. It is plain that the employment of the 
 inhabitants of any country is its true source of wealth j 
 and in India, it has been shewn, that from its commerce 
 alone it derived its superabundant riches ; the Direc- 
 tors, therefore, ought to have turned all their thoughts- 
 to the encouragement of it, and they were continually 
 urged to do so by the representations of their servants 
 on the spot. Every feasible plan that could have been 
 devised for removing all restraints on trade should have 
 been listened to ; and, as they were told by Governor 
 Verelst, such regulations should have been made, " as 
 ;t would leave the fair, industrious merchant at full li- 
 *' berty, and in the undisturbed enjoyment of that free- 
 " dom which is the support and life of commerce in 
 " every country, but more particularly essential in this, 
 c< as its commerce from the most accurate calculations is a 
 
 " clear
 
 ( 15 ) 
 
 " clear and intrinsic gain to it, to the whole amount of its 
 " annual exports." (Verelst's Minutes Sel. Com. i ith 
 August, 1796.) 
 
 If such would be the effects of the encouragement of 
 trade in India, let us look at them in Europe. The 
 avidity with which the commodities of India have 
 been sought after from time immemorial by all other 
 nations induced different States of Europe to establish 
 companies to purchase and bring them from that coun- 
 try to their own ; and it is not saying too much to af- 
 firm, that the English Company would have found a 
 market for all the goods they could have purchased by 
 the joint produce of their surplus revenue and the mo- 
 ney of individuals ; for their own sales were never 
 hurt by the imports of foreign Companies, who had re- 
 ceived the aid of those remittances which the Company 
 had rejected. If, then, there be a demand in the mar- 
 kets of Europe, for all the goods which can be sent 
 from India, whether by the Company or individuals, it 
 is evidently the interest of the Company to permit indi- 
 viduals to provide such goods, and send them to Eng- 
 land. As sovereigns of India, it is a self-evident propo- 
 sition. As merchants here, it does not hurt them; 
 and the benefit to the nation is as demonstrable as that 
 the increase of commerce is an increase of wealth. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN. 
 Lundon, Jan, 20, 1802- 
 
 LETTER
 
 ( 16 ) 
 
 LETTER IV. 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 IN a former letter I have endeavoured to explain 
 the origin of what was called Clandestine Trade, and is 
 now known by the name of Private Trade j but lest 1 
 should not have been sufficiently explicit, and as it is 
 essential to the right understanding of any argument to 
 define the terms of it, I will recur to the subject, and 
 treat of it a little more at large. In this discussion truth 
 is my only object, and I have no other view than to 
 bring it before you, as far as lies in my power, un- 
 disguised, and to prevent your being misled by names 
 to which ideas are associated different from their real 
 import. 
 
 I have already set forth the causes which induced the 
 Court of Directors to prohibit the receipt of money 
 into their treasury from individuals, either for certifi- 
 cates or bills of exchange ; and I have shewed, that 
 by this prohibition they deprived their servants, both 
 civil and military, and free merchants, cf the cus- 
 tomary means of remitting their fortunes to England. 
 The treasuries of other companies, and individuals, 
 as I have before observed, lay open to them ; and in 
 the alternative to which the Company's orders had un- 
 justly reduced their servants, they had recourse to fo- 
 reigners for the remittance of their fortunes which had 
 been, otherwise, useless to them, unless they remained 
 in India all their lives. This recourse was generally 
 had through houses of agency at Calcutta, and those 
 houses made their agreements with foreign merchants 
 
 in
 
 ( 17 ) 
 
 in various forms which mercantile experience dictated aj 
 the safest or most beneficial. For these reasons it was 
 called by the Court of Directors, and not unjustly, a 
 Clandestine Trade j not because the goods were either 
 clandestinely procured in India to their detriment, for 
 the foreign companies had an equal right with them to 
 any articles of India produce or manufacture, nor be- 
 cause the goods were clandestinely brought into Eng- 
 land (for what we have to lament is, that they never 
 came here), but because part of those goods was pro- 
 vided by an English capital, v/hich their own impolitic 
 measures had forced into a foreign channel. 
 
 This capital, of course, increased as the numbers of 
 individuals, and their means to make money, increased ; 
 and the Court of Directors have always been eager to 
 complain, but slow to redress the grievance. Their 
 own exigencies have been the sole cause of their open- 
 ing their treasury for the remittance of private fortunes ; 
 for when, in process of time (and that a very short \/ 
 one) they found their revenues inadequate to their 
 multiplied expences, and that it was impossible to de- 
 fray them and provide an investment too for Europe, 
 they borrowed money for this purpose, and thus were 
 obliged again to open that channel of remittance which 
 they had unjustly shut. In the further progress of 
 changes v/hich, from the varying circumstances of time 
 took place in India and the Company's affairs, it was 
 found there were many articles of trade in which the 
 Company did not deal that afforded means of com- * 
 merce to the free merchants who were settled there, 
 and might be transported to England with great ad- 
 vantage to both countries. These articles, which may 
 
 C properly
 
 ( 18 ) 
 
 properly be called the surplus produce of India, were 
 what the merchants there dealt in, and constitutes what 
 is now called the Private Trade. 
 
 The jealousy of the Company about the monopoly, 
 and those mercantile habits which, Adam Smith ob- 
 serves, draw men almost necessarily, though perhaps 
 insensibly, to prefer the narrower principles of exclusive 
 trade to the more liberal policy of an extended com- 
 merce, prevented the Court of Directors from adopting 
 such measures as this policy would have dictated j and 
 instead of considering in what manner this trade might 
 be encouraged, and brought into the Port of London, 
 they regarded it with apprehension as a rival to their 
 exclusive privileges, and from this fear forced it into fo- 
 reign conveyances. The Legislature, however, viewed 
 this trade in a different light, and saw that it was not 
 only beneficial to India, where it augmented the pro- 
 ductive labour, and of course the revenue of that coun- 
 try, but that it would be highly advantageous to this, 
 by the duties it must pay, by the additional industry it 
 must create, and by making London the mart of its sale 
 instead of foreign parrs. 
 
 On this principle Government wisely acted in 1793, 
 when they renewed the charter of the Company ; and 
 by the Act of Parliament which was then passed, the 
 Legislature changed the state of the exclusive privileges 
 which had been originally granted to the Company. 
 This act conferred on private merchants the right, not 
 only of exporting goods from England to India to a 
 certain amount, but also the right of importing Indian 
 commodities to England. Fiom the spirit in which this 
 right was conceded, and from the words in which it is 
 
 expressed
 
 ( 19 ) 
 
 expressed, it appears evidently to have been the inten- 
 tion of the Legislature to give every reasonable facility 
 to a trade which they justly conceived must be so bene- 
 ficial to India and England, and which they as justly 
 imagined might be so conducted as to put an end to all 
 those complaints and bickerings which were for ever 
 inflaming the counsels of the Directors, and, by depriv- 
 in foreigners of the aid of a British capital, force them 
 to employ their own. This was the plan devised with 
 wisdom for the destruction of clandestine trade, in which 
 it promises to be completely successful, and to afford 
 most important advantages to the Company and British 
 India, if the false alarms of the Directors are not per- 
 mitted to over-rule the judgment of Parliament. 
 
 On this single hinge turns the whole dispute between 
 the Directors and the Private Merchants. The Mer- 
 chants contend that instead of all that facility being 
 granted to their trade, by which alone they could enjoy 
 the rights that had been granted to them, the Directors 
 had thrown insuperable obstacles in their way. The 
 Directors, on the other hand, acknowledge in some 
 degree the justness of these complaints, but rest their vin- 
 dication of what is past on those circumstances of the 
 war, which they could neither prevent nor control. 
 Jn regard to the future, they assert that the facilities 
 which the Merchants demand for carrying on this trade 
 are full of danger to their Chartered Rights, and lead 
 in their effects to Colonization, and ultimately to the 
 annihilation of the Company. These are such exagge- 
 rated fears, that they scarcely merit a serious answer; 
 they have, however, been very ably answered and fully 
 refuted ; and i: now remains to be proved, whether the 
 
 C narrow
 
 ( 20 ) 
 
 narrow policy of the Court of Directors, or the enlarged 
 and enlightened principle of the Legislature, lhall pre- 
 vail. If it mould, unhappily, be the former, it will 
 have a most pernicious effect in India, and it is not 
 within the compass of my understanding to con- 
 ceive how the Company are to employ the ma- 
 nufacturers and realise their revenues, for they cer- 
 tainly have not the means, at present, of procuring 
 any considerable investment for themselves, nor is it 
 likely they should have for some years to come. If, 
 therefore, a necessity on their parts prevent their pro- 
 curing an investment of any considerable amount, and 
 a mistaken policy prohibit other persons employing the 
 manufacturers of India, what is to become of that 
 country ? In my poor opinion, to overlook all the im- 
 mediate evils that must ensue, and to see only the danger 
 of colonization and revolution, is like looking at a 
 prospect through the reversed end of a telescope ; you 
 may imagine, that you have placed the object at a 
 greater distance, but it is as near to you as ever all 
 the effect of this incongruous conduct will be, to make 
 it more difficult to apply a remedy to an instant and 
 dangerous complaint. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN 
 London. Jan. 23. 1SOC. 
 
 LETTER
 
 LETTER V. 
 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 IT appears to be necessary to examine, without fur- 
 ther delay, into the Origin of the ELEVEN PROPOSI- v 
 TIONS relative to Private Trade (styled a BASIS only, by 
 the Chancellor of His Majesty's Exchequer) and the 
 disposition with which the Directors appear to have 
 offered them in place of the Resolutions annexed to 
 their Report. You will recollect, that at the General 
 Court, on the 28th May, the Report and Resolutions V 
 were approved almost by acclamation ; that argument 
 was said to be exhausted, and conviction so manifest 
 and decided, as to leave nothing further to be done, 
 but to act without delay upon the principles those Re- 
 solutions detailed. Yet when that Report came to be v 
 considered by the Board of Commissioners with the in- 
 structions which Mr. Charles Grant had prepared to 
 accompany it to India, it was found that the opinions 
 of the Court of Directors were not opposed only by 
 discontented, interested, and" ungrateful servants, but 
 that men in the highest offices of the State, and distin- 
 guished characters in Parliament, entertained the same 
 sentiments, and differed as widely from the conclusions 
 so hastily adopted in Leadenhall-street. The best proof ^ 
 of this is, that no orders on the subject have at this 
 distant day (ayth January, 1802) received the sanction ^ 
 of Government to be transmitted to India. Was the 
 General Court right then in rejecting all further ad- 
 vice ? I trust that, in candour, the most ardent at that 
 meeting, will now acknowledge that the proposition of 
 
 C 3 their
 
 their opponents was not so totally destitute of common 
 sense and discretion. Another circumstance which oc- 
 curred at that time is well -'deserving your attention, 
 and tha: is the anxiety the Directors affected to feel 
 for the dignity of the Proprietors in their circular letter 
 of the rst of June. Had that feeling positively existed, 
 would it have been possible that they should have de- 
 signedly left you totally in ignorance from that day to 
 this, in respect to the state of this important question ? 
 If such a marked neglect does not satisfy you in what 
 degree of respect you really stand with these gentlemen 
 who profess to hold their offices by your favour, there 
 is an influence operating which has not the Constitution 
 of this Company for its guide, or there is an infatuation 
 prevailing equally inimical to it. Had they acted as 
 most accountable agents would have done, I should not 
 have to depend upon other public channels to enable me 
 to state that after long negotiation, after repeated ef- 
 forts, and after finding the Board of Commissioners not 
 to be moved from their opinion ; ( <c that this business 
 <( involved more than merely commercial considerations ; 
 <c embracing points of great political importance, deeply 
 ft affecting the interests of the State,") the Directors de- 
 sisted from their ineffectual attempts to transmit these 
 impolitic orders to India, and changed the course of their 
 negociations from the Board of India Commissioners to 
 the Treasury. 
 
 As the meeting of Parliament approached, their ap- 
 prehensions were increased ; they found they had but 
 one alternative , the claims of the merchants were so 
 just, that the Treasury would not protect them unless 
 they came forward with some concessions, and granted 
 
 to
 
 ( S3 ) 
 
 to the Private Traders some of those facilities which 
 they hitherto had denied. When Sir William Pulte- 
 ney's motion was on the point of being made in the 
 House of Commons, they reluctantly declared to the 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer, that they would confirm 
 Lord Wellesley's plan for the two ensuing seasons, and 
 for a further experiment they offered these eleven pro- 
 positions as a basis : at least such was the account given 
 by the Minister in his place : and in consequence the 
 House saw no occasion to appoint a Committee to ex- 
 amine into a matter that was compromised. I do not 
 now find fault with this compromise, as it was under- 
 stood in the House ; but there will be reason to question 
 it presently. 
 
 I must stop here to beg you will review the conduct 
 of your Court of Directors. They came with suppli- 
 cation even to the General Court, for they individually 
 canvassed most of the members in favour of their Re- 
 port, and they obtained the instruction they wished. 
 Having thus a positive duty to discharge, at their own 
 request, for the performance of which they were re- 
 sponsible to you, what have they done ? Why, insensi- 
 ble of your rights, though bound as much as duty could 
 bind a public body, they have treated you with total 
 inattention, and instead of executing what you had 
 positively directed them to carry into effect, they have, 
 as soon as they found opposition from Government, of- 
 fered a concession, without even asking your consent, 
 or referring to you for your approbation ; and although 
 it is in a point that they solemnly declared would even- 
 tually be attended with ruin to the Company. Where 
 are your privileges, where are your rights, if the Di- 
 
 C 4 rectors
 
 ( 24 ) 
 
 rectors ate justified in such conduct as this ? Look to 
 the tenor of the orders the Directors were desirous of 
 sending to India in June last, and the solemn declara- 
 tions they made in favour of them : but now they are 
 willing to give up those opinions, and to adopt, with 
 certain qualifications, the plans of their opponents ; 
 yet, you, whose property and whose charter they are 
 sporting with, are not even to be informed of what's 
 going forward, or to have an opportunity of making 
 your election, whether your affairs shall be conducted 
 under the regulations you and they so lately preferred j 
 or whether the reasons they can now assign are sufficient 
 to convince you, as well as them, that what you so pe- 
 remptorily resolved, had better be rescinded. If this 
 sort of conduct shall find its advocates, it is a very power- 
 ful evidence indeed, that there is too much reason to. 
 believe Sir William Pulteney was correct when he 
 stated this Company to be over-ruled by an Aristocracy 
 of thirty. 
 
 Such was the origin of these eleven propositions ; 
 their tendency and effect I shall not say much of -, be- 
 cause, whatever there might be in them to make the 
 House of Commons believe that they intended a fair 
 experiment between the British and India built ships^ 
 there is a mysterious circumstance attending this trans- 
 action, which you have a right to call upon your Di- 
 rectors to explain, for it at present exposes them to the 
 imputation of not having been sincere in any such in- 
 tention. Mr, Addington, Lord Glenbervie, indeed 
 the House in general, understood that these eleven pro- 
 positions contained only the terms of an experiment , by 
 which it would be tried whether British ships were pre- 
 ferable
 
 ( 2.5 ) 
 
 fcrable to India ships for the trade in question ; not a 
 single member entertained an idea, as far as can be 
 learned from the debate, that all India built ships were to 
 be excluded totally from this navigation, except under 
 contracts in conformity with the eleven Resolutions ; 
 but this appears to have been the design of the Direc- 
 tors, even before they knew what the sense of Parlia- 
 ment might be ; for after the Chairman and Deputy 
 had held a conference with the Minister on the morn- 
 ing previous to the debate on Sir William Pulteney's 
 motion, they called a secret Court of Directors, and of 
 that secret meeting they have very lately given us the 
 following record : 
 
 e At a secret Court of Directors, held on Wednes-. 
 
 ' 
 f day, the 25th of November, 1801, the Chairman 
 
 c acquainted the Court that the Deputy and himself 
 c waited on the Chancellor of the Exchequer this 
 ' morning, and that at the conference some amend- 
 f ments were proposed to be made to a paper, contain- 
 f ing the sentiments of the Special Committee, which 
 ( the Chairs were yesterday desired to state to Mr. 
 e Addington. The said paper, as amended, was then 
 c read and approved, being as follows, viz. <( The 
 <c Committee conceive that the propositions herewith 
 tf enclosed are calculated to meet the wishes of his 
 Et Majesty's Ministers, and to form the basis of a final 
 rc and satisfactory arrangement, but as much depends 
 lf on the manner in which this arrangement shall be 
 " made known in India, the Committee presume, that 
 " the best mode by which it can be done, will be by 
 u paragraphs to India, to be approved of by the Board 
 :< of Commissioners, In these the Court will acquaint 
 
 ** Marquis
 
 ( 26 ) 
 v ' c Marquis Welleslcy, that they confirm the agreement 
 
 */ <f which he has made with the owners of Indian Ships 
 <f taken up for the Red Sea, for one voyage to Eu- 
 " rope j and that the same, in the discretion of Mar- 
 " quis Wellesley, be extended to all the ships engaged 
 <c in that service, provided they, or the ships built to re- 
 " place such as may have been lost or disabled, leave 
 
 /\ " India Before the ist of April 180.3. But as his 
 " Lordship cannot have received in India the whole 
 <c of the information necessary to enable him to form a 
 " correct judgment on a subject which is of a most ex- 
 tc tensive nature, the Committee, in consenting to con- 
 
 \ <f firm the contracts entered into, cannot agree to ex- 
 
 \ " tend the principle in the manner before proposed by 
 
 j " his Lordship. And the Court will therefore direct, 
 
 " that no other teak, or India built ship, shall be em- 
 
 ]f ployed on a voyage to Europe, except under, and 
 
 T< in conformity with the eleven Resolutions sane- 
 
 " tioned by the Court of Directors on the 17th 
 
 " instant." 
 
 * And the Chairman and Deputy were requested 
 ' to transmit a copy of the above paper to the Right 
 '.Honourable the Chancellor of the Exchequer.' 
 
 This Resolution, in the first place, abandons a point 
 that had been strongly and frequently insisted on, and 
 admits the paragraphs shall be sent to the Board of 
 Commissioners for approbation. So that they no longer 
 contend that it is purely a commercial question. In 
 the next place, it shews a great want of confidence in 
 Marquis Wellesley, and a strong disinclination wallow 
 a sufficiency of Indian tonnage for the seasons of 1 802-3, 
 which was clearly promised in the House of Com. 
 
 mons.
 
 ( 27 ) 
 
 mons, either in ships that had been in the Red Sea, or 
 other Indian Ships to that amount. But lastly, it declares, 
 to the astonishment, it must be, of every one, that no 
 other teak or Indian built ship shall be employed in a voyage 
 to Europe, except under, and -in conformity with y the eleven 
 Resolutions. This clearly shews that they were resolved / 
 to consider the eleven propositions as a definitive arrange- V 
 menty although no such thing appears on the face of 
 them ; although the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 explained them differently j and although they knew 
 the House of Parliament was that very day to give 
 their opinion upon them. The time, the manner, and 
 the contents of this paper are equally extraordinary ; 
 they are pointed out, that they may be explained, and 
 I do hope, that you will at least agree with me in this, 
 that whenever your Directors submit any thing to the 
 Minister for the information of the House of Com- 
 mons, they ought not to 'leave the Company subject 
 to the imputation of having kept back any part of 
 their case. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN. 
 
 London, Jan. 27, 1802. 
 
 LETTER VI. 
 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 IN my last I had the honour to state to you the ori- 
 gin of the eleven propositions, as well as the secret 
 resolution of the Court of Directors respecting them. 
 I shall now proceed to lay before you a few observa- 
 tions on the debate which Mr. Woodfall reports to have 
 
 taken
 
 , ^ J 
 
 ( 28 ) ~ 
 
 taken place upon those propositions ; and upon the sub- 
 ject of Indian Private Trade on the 25th of November 
 last. The debate was opened by Sir William Pulteney, 
 in a very masterly manner, explaining the different 
 situations of the India Company, from its first establish- 
 ment to the time it acquired territory and sovereignty 
 in India; and from thence down to 1793, when the 
 Parliament thought it expedient that the Company 
 should no longer enjoy the trade totally exclusive of all 
 other British subjects ; but that a further term should 
 be granted to them of the territories in India, together 
 with their exclusive trade, under certain limitations. 
 This was a new compact between the Public and the 
 Company, at a period when their exclusive rights were 
 at an end ; and the principal condition in this new com- 
 pact was, to convey certain rights to the British 
 merchants in England, and those resident in India, un- 
 der which they were to have a share in the trade be- 
 tween our Asiatic territories and the port of London. 
 To this Act 1 beg to recommend your particular atten- 
 tion, that you may not be misled into a belief that you 
 still possess an entire exclusive right to this trade, and 
 that what the private merchants enjoy is through the 
 favour and indulgence of the India Company ; whereas 
 their right stands upon the very same foundation with 
 your own ; and their complaint now is, that the Com- 
 pany do not perform their part of the compact, inas- 
 much as they obstruct the private trade, instead of grant- 
 ing it all those facilities which the merchants consider 
 themselves entitled to. Sir William Pulteney thought 
 their representations so well founded (and he is not a 
 man who takes up any matter hastily) that after calling 
 
 for
 
 ( 29 ) 
 
 for a variety of papers, he acknowledged the Case to 
 be deservin g of serious investigation ; and we find, ac- 
 cording to Mr. Woodfall, that the Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer declared his opinion to be, tc that the Court 
 " of Directors had not given those facilities which, by 
 ff the decision of Parliament t they were required to ex- 
 fc tend to the Private Trade." Under such a circum- 
 stance of imputed neglect, is it safe, or is it just, for the 
 Directors to come forward and say their chartered rights 
 are infringed ? May not your charter rather be ques- 
 tioned on the ground of their negligence, and is it not 
 the duty of this Company to shew a readiness to make 
 amends for this error, rather than to enter into a contest 
 where there is almost a general acknowledgment that 
 they have been deficient in the performance of their part 
 of the contract ? 
 
 It is stated by Mr. Woodfall, that the Chancellor of 
 the Exchequer declared, tf that the assertion would be 
 " found to be groundless that British subjects were not 
 f< allowed those advantages which were given to the 
 f< foreign trader." Yet how easy is it to shew, that 
 the foreign merchant is not restrained from buying or 
 selling any articles, not totally prohibited, while the Bri- 
 tish merchant is expressly forbidden to deal in almost all 
 that would interfere with the Company's investment 
 that the foreign merchant has the advantage of loading 
 his own ships, and sailing at his own times, while the 
 British merchant is not to be allowed to do either, if 
 the Directors prevail in the present contest that the 
 foreign merchant sails at a lower freight, and lower 
 charges, with the full benefit of all his own industry 
 and expedition, while the British merchant is subjected 
 
 to
 
 ( 30 ) 
 
 to a higher and arbitrary freight, and all his own per- 
 sonal d ilige nee and exertion rendered of no avail to 
 him. It is superfluous to stale other, but inferior con* 
 siderations ; these are sufficient to prove that the fo- 
 reign merchant has many advantages over the British,, 
 The Minister appeared to be sensible of the state of 
 ship timber in this country, and acknowledged " that 
 " every plan for effecting a reduction in the price of it 
 " was deserving of the most serious attention;" he 
 also allowed, that " the Private Trade was of very high 
 " consequence ; it presented new openings for the 
 " commerce, and new encouragements to the manu- 
 cc factures of the mother country." As to the objec- 
 tions, and the apprehensions of the Directors, he ap- 
 pears to have treated them with no great ceremony. 
 The argument about Lascars " appeared to his mind 
 " extremely feeble and inconclusive." As to coloni- 
 zation, ** he did not view the danger from this fource 
 ff in a light so strong as that exhibited in the Report/' 
 and he is faid to have concluded with a declaration, 
 " that he was ready to support any fair proposition for 
 <c compelling the Court of Directors to comply with the 
 f< wishes of Parliament, as expressed in the Act of 1793, 
 " to grant to the private track every necessary degree 
 " of facility." 
 
 I should have been happy to have found any of the 
 Directors of the Company entering into the merits of 
 the case ; and arguing it upon fuch grounds, for a mo- 
 nopoly cannot exist unless it can be well defended: and 
 abuse of persons, or general assertions, are not the means 
 which convince an enlightened assembly. If any man 
 should say to me " that the merchants in India were 
 
 tc children
 
 ( 31 ) 
 
 * c children rising against their parents; servants labour-* 
 " ing to subvert the interests of their masters; and 
 " that their claims were of an illegitimate description 
 tr against the chartered rights of a legitimate body," I 
 should answer, let them be inquired into; the mer- 
 chants make no claims of such a description ; and in 
 the opinion of many they are labouring to support, in- 
 stead pf subvert, the interests of the Company: for 
 their claims are approved by numbers of those who arc 
 best acquainted with Indian politics and commerce. 
 
 If any man should say <c that it was uniformly found 
 tf that the trade of the Company decreased, as that of 
 " the private merchants advanced," I should refer him 
 to the accounts publiflied from the India House, which 
 prove the reverse; and that the trade of the Company 
 and Private Trade have progressively and mutually in- 
 creased. 
 
 If any man should say, fc that the foreign trade has 
 " increased of late years more than ever," I should 
 answer, examine your own Report, and you will find all 
 the Directors declaring the very contrary. 
 
 If any man should say, " that these very men, in the 
 " last year, acting as private traders, their investments 
 " being on board private ships which sailed singly, they 
 f< reached India long before the Company's fleet, 
 <r which was obliged to wait the completion of all their 
 " cargoes, and sail in company with convoy, by which 
 " means the private ships had not only forestalled the 
 cc markets there before their arrival, but bought up 
 ff new freights of India goods for remittance to Eng- 
 " land, to forestal them here also," 1 should answer, 
 that the ships of the merchants always sailed with con- 
 voy.
 
 ( 32 ) 
 
 voy, but it was with the earliest convoy they could join; 
 they could not, however, forestal the markets in pre- 
 judice to the Company, because the Company have 
 their stated periods for sales by auction, and would not 
 deviate from their system, whether they got to India a 
 little sooner or a little later, and the generality of the 
 private cargoes the Company do not deal in. And as 
 to cargoes of India goods for sale in Europe, I should 
 answer, that the merchants could not forestal the Com- 
 pany here, because all the ships come home with the 
 same convoy, and the Directors themselves determined 
 at what periods the private goods should be sold, which 
 uniformly has been after their own. But why do the 
 Directors in all such arguments as this carefully omit 
 how much foreigners can forestal and rival them ? of 
 which more shall be said another day. 
 
 If any man should say, " That whenever permission 
 ** was granted for the India built ships to come to Eu- 
 " rope, the private merchants would not load upon 
 sc the Company's ships, by which means their tonnage 
 " remained unoccupied," I should answer, that the 
 records of the India House will shew the Governors 
 have more than once been obliged to allow India built 
 ships to come home, becaufe the Directors had not 
 supplied a sufficiency of British tonnage; that the Com- 
 pany's tonnage has not remained unoccupied from such 
 a cause, but that the merchants solicit to be allowed the 
 use of India shipping for very evident reasons, which 
 have been too often detailed already to make it expedi- 
 tnt to repeat them here. 
 
 If any man should find fault with Marquis Wellesley 
 for giving leave to the Indian built ships to come to 
 
 Europe
 
 . 
 
 Europe in fourteen days after his arrival, I should an- 
 swer that if he did so, he did it in consequence, not only 
 of what he learned in India, but from that confirming 
 all he had understood upon the subject while he was 
 here, and a Member of the Board of India Commis~ 
 sioners, and that all the experience he has since had in 
 four years convinces him he was right, and every ser- 
 vant abroad agrees with him, as well as the late and 
 actual President of the India Board at home ; but the 
 most extraordinary part of this case is, that it turns out 
 to be mere assertion j for instead of fourteen days, Mar- 
 quis Wellesley was in Bengal five months before he 
 granted permission to a single ship -, he arrived on the 
 iyth of May, 1798, and his first orders on this subject 
 are given on the 5th of Odlober following. 
 
 If any man should say, " that a French agent had 
 <c offered the Company ten per cent, over and ai ove 
 fc the cost of their investments in India, and to bring 
 " the same home in French bottoms ;" and ask, " How 
 " then could any private trader supply France with In- 
 <r dia goods cheaper than the East India Company?" 
 I should answer, that no such agreement was ever 
 made; that probably an old Director was the best able 
 to explain this matter, as one was sent upon such an 
 embassy to Paris, but returned with only a long bill fo r 
 the charges of his hospitality. The French, in short, 
 learnt all they wished cr all they could ; and then coolly 
 dismissed the Ambassador v-.ith an apology, which, if re- 
 port says true, was sufficiently mortifying. But I should 
 also state, that with ten per cent, added to the prime 
 cost, if the French exerted the diligence, and practised 
 the economy of private merchants, they would even 
 
 D then
 
 ( 34 ) 
 
 then have come into the market as cheap as the English 
 East India Company, over whom they would also have 
 had a farther advantage in respect to duties. 
 
 If any man should say, " that he had the fullest 
 " proofs of many of the documents which found their 
 " way to England being actually fabricated in England, 
 " and sent out to India in order to find their way back 
 " in an authentic shape," I should answer, that if he 
 were a Director of the Company, there was a duty he 
 had laid himself under, which called loudly upon him 
 to exhibit thofe proofs, and bring down on the parties 
 all the indignation of the Company ; and until he had 
 done that, he had no right to credit for such general 
 assertions in any other place. That such things exist 
 is not within my belief, but if a man in office volunta- 
 rily and publicly declares he \\zsthe fullest proof of such 
 occurrences, his constituents may very reasonably add, 
 Ton ought then to exhibit them ; at least so say I as one 
 of them. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN. 
 London, Jan. 30, 180C. 
 
 LETTER VII. 
 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 jf\S the question between the Directors of the East 
 India Company and the Private Merchants respecting 
 the trade of India is more and more developed, it 
 must necessarily force itself upon your attention in com- 
 mon with the rest of the public. All are beginning to 
 teel its deep importance to the prosperity of this great 
 
 commercial
 
 commercial empire ; and however temporary events 
 and interests may suspend its discussion by Parlia- 
 ment, nothing can finally prevent -its decision by that 
 great ultimate tribunal, but a cordial accommodation 
 between the contending parries on the principles of 
 the Act of 1793, from which the Company, as well as 
 the private merchants, derive all their rights. 
 
 Before that statute the right of the Company to the 
 Indian trade, as against the British merchant, whether 
 in India or England, was perfectly exclusive ; the Le- 
 gislature, actuated by a narrow and short-sighted po- 
 licy, had endeavoured to extinguish that commercial 
 spirit, which animates Englishmen in whatever climate 
 of the globe they may reside. To remedy this great 
 and growing evil was one of the principal objects of 
 national policy in framing the Act of 1793. The pe- 
 riod was favourable to these efforts ; for by the convul- 
 sions that shook the Continent of Europe, and by the 
 war that had broken our, the foreign commercial sys- 
 tem was deranged ; the monopoly of the East India 
 Company was expiring -, and it was hoped by limiting 
 that monopoly for the future, and by granting a license 
 to private commerce both to and from India, under the 
 shelter and protection of the Company, that not only 
 all British wealth might be again diverted from foreign 
 channels, but the manufactures, revenues, arid naviga- 
 tion of the British empire in India and Europe, might 
 be sensibly increased by this new accession of com- 
 merce. 
 
 To ensure the attainment of these salutary ends the 
 Parliament, by the Act of 1793, introduced, under 
 limitations, a new party and a new interest into the 
 
 D 2 Indian
 
 Indian commerce ; this new party was the whole body 
 of private British merchants resident either in our Eu- 
 ropean or Indian empire; this new interest was prima- 
 rily the commercial interest of thofe merchants, but 
 ultimately the commercial and financial interest of the 
 State. The ancient exclusive privileges of the Company 
 were renewed to a certain point only ; the monopoly, 
 or rather the pre-emption of the most valuable and im- 
 portant articles of the trade was continued to them; 
 and lest the introduction of the private merchants might 
 serve as a handle for the infringement of their just 
 rights and the foundation of illicit traffic, the whole of 
 the new trade was subjected, practically, to the super- 
 intendance and direction of the Company : But on 
 the other hand, lest their jealousy and uncontrouled 
 power might induce and enable them to stifle this infant 
 commerce, a paramount fuperintendance of the Private 
 
 V Trade is given to the Commissioners of the Board of 
 Controul, as trustees for the public, and to them the 
 merchants are directed to look in the first instance for 
 remedy against any infringement of their rights by the 
 India Company. Doubts have been entertained by 
 
 V men conversant in legal and political topics as to the 
 extent of the powers vested in the Board of Controul 
 for the protection and support of the Private Trade ; to 
 these doubts I wish at present principally to draw your 
 attention, because, on the one hand, if Parliament has 
 already established a tribunal adequate to the determi- 
 nation of controversies between the Company and the 
 Private Merchants, the decisions and acts of that tri- 
 bunal should supersede the necessity of an application to 
 the Legislature ; if, on the other hand, the powers al- 
 ready
 
 ( 37 ) 
 
 ready vested in the Board of Controul are inadequate 
 to their end, it is full time for Parliament to interfere, 
 to explain and amend their own at, and bestow such 
 additional powers as may suffice to shelter and encou- 
 rage the trade they have established for the benefit of 
 the country. 
 
 A right without a remedy is an absurdity in Legis- 
 lation, and almost a contradiction in terms ; that cer- 
 tain rights are vested in the private- traders by the Ad 
 of 1793 it is impossible to deny; they are detailed in 
 almost every section from the 8ist to the IOISL After 
 a perusal of these I say it is impossible to deny that the 
 private traders possess many valuable rights ; and that 
 the remedy for the infringement of them is an order 
 from the Board of Commissioners, is equally clear, for 
 it is specially provided by the Act. 
 
 But it is in the power of the Directors to comply 
 with all the provisions of the statute, and yet utterly to 
 frustrate its policy and annihilate the Private Trade by 
 vexatious and cumbrous regulations. They direct the 
 periods at which the ships conveying the Private Trade 
 shall sail both from England and India; they distribute 
 the cargoes at their pleasure. Let us for an instant sup- 
 pose them obstinately bent to exert this power for the 
 most pernicious purposes ; let us suppose them resolute 
 in disposing the cargoes of the private merchants in the 
 most inconvenient manner, and unreasonably delaying 
 the dispatch of the private ships; have the merchants 
 no remedy ? Must this commerce, sanctioned and en- 
 couraged by the Legislature, perish without hope of 
 redrefs ? 
 
 D 3 In
 
 ( 38 ) 
 
 In my opinion the Legislature has nor been so im- 
 provident ; though it was impossible for any Act of 
 Parliament to provide specially for every possible case, 
 it has given general powers to the Board of Commission- 
 ers sufficiently extensive to countera6b any contumaci- 
 ous resistance of the Company to the British commerce. 
 I know that in the cases I have supposed no special 
 power is given by the statute to the Commissioners to 
 order the distribution of the cargoes or the dispatch of 
 the vessels, but I contend that they have a general 
 power by the Act to superintend the Private Trade, as 
 ultimately interwoven with the general prosperity of 
 the British empire, with its manufactures, commerce, 
 navigation and revenues ; and that such orders as they 
 may issue on these subjects for the advancement of the 
 policy adopted by the Act of 1793, are binding on the 
 Directors. 
 
 AN F,NGITSn*J\v 
 London, Feb. 3, 1802. 
 
 LETTER VIII. 
 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 IN the conclusion of my last letter I contended that 
 the Commissioners for the affairs of India are vested 
 by the Act of 1793, with a general power to su- 
 perintend the Private Trade, and that their orders 
 on this head are binding on the Court of Directors. 
 I a.'mit that the whole " exclusive" trade of India 
 is vested in the Company by the 7151 sect, of the Ad 
 of 1793, <f subject, nevertheless, to the several li- 
 
 <c mitations
 
 '( 39 ) 
 
 <c mitations, conditions, and regulations in the Act 
 "contained;" that by the i6th section, "nothing in 
 " the Ad contained shall extend to give the Board of 
 " Commissioners power to issue or send any orders or 
 <( instructions which do not relate to "points connected 
 " with the Civil or Military Government, or Revenues 
 " of the British territories or possessions in India." 
 On the other hand, it must be conceded to me, that by 
 the 9th section- the Board of Commissioners are vested 
 with full power and authority to superintend, direct, and 
 controul all acts, operations, and concerns, which in 
 any wise relate to, or concern the civil or military Go- 
 vernment or Revenues <c of the Company's territories in 
 <c the East Indies/' under which of these clauses, acts 
 and orders operating on the Private Trade arrange 
 themselves is the sole question. 
 
 The genuine construction of the i6th section I take 
 to be, that the Board of Commissioners shall not inter- 
 fere with the trade of the East India Company, but 
 that they shall be allowed to carry it on in the manner 
 which they shall judge most profitable to themselves : 
 It is derived from the Act of 1784, framed long before 
 the Private Trade was thought of, and is calculated to 
 fix" this strong line of limitation to the powers of the 
 Commissioners, that they shall not in any case under 
 pretence of political interests interfere with the private 
 affairs of the Company. Can it be contended that the 
 Private Trade is within the same line of distinction? 
 Are the Commissioners prohibited in any case to inter- 
 icre with that * So far from it that in many cases they 
 are expressly directed to interfere, and are in the strictest 
 sense constituted the trustees of the public for the pro- 
 
 D 4 te-ftion
 
 ( 40 ) 
 
 tection of that trade against the Company. It is im- 
 possible that the i6th section should have any relation 
 whatever to the Private Trade, unless the Legislature 
 who first framed that limitation in the year 1784, can 
 be supposed to have foreseen a trade which had its ori- 
 gin in 1793. 
 
 If I were asked, whether any particular matter were 
 within the jurisdiction of the Board of Commissioners, 
 I should regulate my answer by inquiring, not whe- 
 ther it was a commercial matter, but in the words of 
 the statute, * f whether it related to points connected 
 cc with the civil and military Goverment, or the Reve- 
 et nues" of British India. Does not the Private Trade 
 relate to those points ? Is not its encouragement or 
 depression inseparably connected with the increase of 
 the manufactures, wealth, population, and revenues of' 
 our Eastern territories ? 1 think all men must a^ree 
 
 O 
 
 in a proposition so self-evident, and over all such matters 
 the Act of 1793 has given to the Commissioners a clear 
 authority. 
 
 The late President of the Board of Commissioners, 
 under whose auspices the Act of 1793 was framed, has 
 declared his decided sentiments, that the great question 
 which is at present agitated relative to the permission of 
 Indian shipping in the Private Trade, is within the po- 
 licy of that statute, by asserting in a letter read in Par- 
 liament, that " if the difficulty which had now occurred, 
 " had come under consideration, there could be no doubt 
 f( that it would likewise have been expressly provided 
 " for in the Act." 
 
 The present Board of Commissioners must entertain 
 a similar opinion, for they say in their letter to the 
 
 Court
 
 Court of Directors of the 2d June last, f the proposi- 
 ff tion, extended as it is, fixing permanently and finally 
 ff the condition of the Private Trade, and confining it 
 " solely to British ships, appears to us to involve in it 
 " much more than merely commercial considerations, 
 <f and to embrace points of great political importance, 
 " which may in thsir consequences deeply affect the 
 rc interests of the State." That the Directors are not 
 very consistent in an opposire interpretation of the law- 
 may reasonably be presumed from their repeatedly sub- 
 mitting their orders on this subject to the Board, which, 
 if not subject to their controul, is quite superfluous, as 
 no orders but such as are alterable by the Board, are 
 required to be laid before them by the statute. Nay j 
 they seem finally to have adopted a similar opinion 
 by their Resolution of the i$ih November lad, which 
 is among the papers lately submitted to the Proprie- 
 tors, in which they state, {C that the best way to make 
 <c their arrangements on this subject known in India, 
 " will be by paragraphs to be approved by the Commis- 
 <f s toners." 
 
 It is certainly incumbent on the Board of Commis- 
 sioners to be thoroughly convinced that authority over 
 this subject is delegated to them by Parliament before 
 they venture to exercise it ; but, having once attained 
 that conviction, I do most earnestly hope, as a proprie- 
 tor and as a friend to the East India Company, that 
 they will not shrink from their duty, but that they will 
 set themselves thoroughly to investigate the question, 
 and settle it in such a manner as will best reconcile the 
 interests of all. If doubt or diffidence should obstruct 
 this salutary exercise of their powers, Parliament must 
 
 be
 
 ( 42. ) 
 
 be the final arbiters, and how far the interposition of 
 Parliament is favourable to the interests of the Com- 
 pany, and what thanks the Proprietors owe to the 
 Executive Body for referring a matter which it is yet 
 in their power to accommodate, to that Tribunal, fu- 
 ture experience, added to the past, will, I fear, soon 
 teach u. 
 
 In my next I shall consider the question, how far the 
 interference of the Legislature on this subject can be 
 considered as any violation or infringement of the Com- 
 pany's charter. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN. 
 London, Feb. 6, 1802. 
 
 LETTER 
 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 AN my last I detailed to you my reasons for thinking 
 that, as the Legislature have indisputably vested certain 
 rights in the Private Traders, independent of the will 
 of the East India Company, it has likewise delegated 
 to the Commissioners for the Affairs of India powers 
 fully adequate to the enforcement of them on the part 
 of the public. But if this on full consideration should 
 turn out to be a casus omissusy if it should appear that 
 Parliament have x given to the merchants of this coun- 
 try and of British India privileges absolutely essential 
 to the conduct of their trade, but have pointed out no 
 specific mode of redressing the violation of them, it 
 seems to me a proposition almost too clear for argument, 
 <c that it becomes the duty of the Legislature to sup- 
 " ply the acknowledged defects in the Act of 1793* 
 
 "by
 
 ( 43 ) 
 
 t( by explaining and amending it, to assert and esta- 
 *' blish those rights which, though clearly created, 
 f< were left unprotected by that statute, and to establish 
 tc the Private Trade between Great Britain and India on 
 Cf a foundation never again to be shaken/' 
 
 But, say the Directors, the Legislature have.no right 
 to explain and amend the Adi of 1793 ; it is a breach of 
 the charter of the East India Company. The Chair- 
 man tells Mr. Addington, in his letter of the yth of No- 
 vember 1 80 1, that though "he is sensible that the 
 cc East India Company are strongly implicated with the 
 tf public Government of the country, and that it may 
 tc appear ungracious on their part to oppose legal rights 
 <f in the rigid letter of their compact to any reasonable 
 <e change which the public interest may seem to re- 
 '' quire ;" yet in another part he says, " To undefined 
 " claims, urged before the Legislature on grounds of 
 " political expediency, the East India Company, I ap- 
 <( prehend, are compelled to oppose their rights, /ound- 
 fc ed on a deliberate compact with the public, after a 
 v< laborious and minute discussion, confirmed by Par- 
 " liamenr." 
 
 This is speaking a very bold language ; whether it be 
 equally prudent, the event must determine. What is 
 it but declaring that though <( the measure proposed 
 " be reasonable, and the public interest seems to ro- 
 " quire it," yet the Minister dares not support it in 
 Parliament against the power of the East India Com- 
 pany ; that they will shelter themselves under the rigid 
 letter of their compact, will raise an unanimous cla- 
 mour that their chartered rights are invaded, and will 
 assail the public ear with an argument, which I quote 
 
 literally
 
 ( 44 ) 
 
 literally from the Chairman's letter, " If the rights of 
 " the Company may be narrowed, they may also be 
 " overturned, and it must be understood in future that 
 " those who form compacts with the State, hold what 
 " they have understood to be rights during the good 
 " pleasure of Parliament ?" 
 
 That this line of conduct might probably be pur- 
 sued by the Directors in the present case, was foreseen 
 by Mr. Pitt during the last session of Parliament from 
 some symptoms that broke out in a conversation, which 
 took place in the House of Commons on the i2th of 
 last June. How that great Statesman treated it may be 
 worthy the attention of the Proprietors, and perhaps 
 even of the Directors. You will find in Mr. Wood- 
 fall's account of what passed on that day the following 
 passages of Mr. Pitt's speech : " He found it was the 
 " intention of some Gentlemen to endeavour to raise a 
 " clamour, as if the charter of the East India Com- 
 " P an X anc ^ c he rights they held under it were attack- 
 * f ed j but that would not do : the question, whether 
 " the subjects of this country in India should be per- 
 " mittcd to carry on their own commerce in their own 
 tl shipping, had nothing to do with the charter or rights 
 " of the Company." Such is Mr. Pitt's opinion, and 
 perhaps on examination we may find it is equally found- 
 ed in reason, in law, and in policy. 
 
 Jt is true that by the Act of 1793, the general su- 
 perintendance of the Private Trade was vested in, or 
 rather confided to the Company j but it should be re- 
 collected that this was a trust reposed in them, for the 
 joint benefit of themselves and the public, not an arbi- 
 trary power to be exened according to their capricious 
 
 discretion :
 
 ( '45 ) 
 
 discretion' : One end pursued by the Legislature in that 
 provision was, I admit, to preserve the monopoly of 
 the Company in certain articles of merchandize from 
 invasion, and to protect the revenue from fraud, but 
 another end, which they no less anxiously looked to 
 \vas, the encouragement and promotion of the Private 
 Trade by every practicable facility and liberal indulgence, 
 and this latter object they considered as it really is, 
 equally conducive to the prosperity of the nation and 
 of the East India Company. 
 
 The Directors are so totally occupied by their attach- 
 ment to their own rights, that they seem to have quite 
 forgotten those of the Private Merchants. These latter 
 have a right to an assignment of their tonnage by the 
 East India Company in such vessels as may best con- 
 tribute to the success of this valuable branch of com- 
 merce, by the lowness, as well of their freight as of other 
 charges appurtenant to their voyage ; they have a right 
 that their convenience should be consulted as far as it is 
 practicable in the shipping of their cargoes and dispatch 
 of their ships. I know not on what principle it can be 
 contended that the privileges of the merchants are less 
 sacred than the prerogatives of the Company. If it 
 should finally appear that the Directors have been in an 
 habitual and systematic course of violating the rights of 
 others, given and secured by the same Act which consti- 
 tutes their charter, and the preservation of which forms 
 one of the conditions of it, with what face can they 
 stand up in the House of Commons and complain of 
 an infraction of their charter, were even such an infrac- 
 tion attempted ? I am afraid it might be asked, what 
 right they had to stand upon the rigid letter of a com-
 
 ( 46 ) 
 
 pact which they themselves had first broken, or to call 
 for the protection of that public, whose commerce, 
 equally legal with their own, they had wantonly or op- 
 pressively impeded ? 
 
 Even allowing the Directors to state their case in 
 
 ^3 
 
 their own way, and in the view most favourable to 
 themselves, I cannot at all agree in their conclusions : 
 Were I even to admit that the power in question, of 
 controuling at will the Private Trade, had been pur- 
 chased of the public for a valuable consideration, yet 
 " if the public interest requires a change," I am far from 
 thinking the Legislature would not be .justified in limit- 
 ing that power, or, if necessary, in abolishing it. Can I 
 need any argument for the support of that opinion, when 
 it is known to be the constant practice of Parliament, in 
 Inclosure and Canal Bills, and many others, to divest 
 men even of their private estates (f because the public 
 <f interest requires it ?" Or can it be necessary for me 
 to cite the daily instances of this nature that are passing 
 before our eyes in a country where it has been an univer- 
 sally admitted principle, time out of mind, " that all pri- 
 tc vate interests, whether of individuals or bodies corpo- 
 " rate must yield to those of the public ?" 
 
 If any clear indisputable interest of the public de- 
 manded that the East India Company should be de- 
 prived of their house in Leadenhall-street, or of the 
 whole of their commercial privileges, few men, I think, 
 can doubt that it would become the duty of Parliament 
 to pass a law, stripping them of either, or both. I am 
 far from thinking that such a case may probably, or even 
 can occur ; I am asserting the principle in its full 
 extent. But if such an event were to happen, the 
 
 Company
 
 ( 47 ) 
 
 Company would certainly be entitled to a full indemnity 
 for whatever loss they could shew themselves to have 
 sustained, from that public to whose interests theirs had 
 been sacrificed. 
 
 So in this case, if the merchants can satisfy Parlia- 
 ment that public interest calls for a modification or cur- 
 tailment of the powers hitherto exercised by the Com- 
 pany over the Private Trade, their conviction of that fad 
 will fully justify any Act of' Parliament passed to mo- 
 dify or curtail those powers. On the other hand, if 
 the Company can shew any loss or detriment that will 
 arise to them from such a measure, to the satisfaction 
 of Parliament, justice requires that they should be ade- 
 quately indemnified. 
 
 Far from imagining that any loss or detriment can 
 arise to any one from the emancipation, if I may so 
 call it, of the Private Trade, I am convinced that incal- 
 culable benefits would spring from it even to the Com- 
 pany ; that the population and wealth of British India 
 would be increased, that the produce and manufac- 
 tures of that country and this would reciprocally stimu- 
 late and extend each other, and that the revenues both 
 of the Company and the Crown would be thereby 
 proportionally augmented -, but if the Directors can 
 shew any actual or probable loss to arise from the mea- 
 sure, or any franchise of theirs that is invaded, let them 
 state it, let them estimate it, and they may safely rely 
 on the generosity, as well as justice of the Legislature 
 for an ample recomperice. 
 
 But what is this chartered right which the Directors 
 hold up as a shield against Parliament, and which they 
 call so loudly on the nation to unite with them in sus-
 
 ( 48 ) 
 
 taining ? As far as I understand the question, I 
 cannot otherwise define it, than as a power to exercise 
 arbitrary oppression over the Private Trader, to the in- 
 evitable ruin of his commerce, without the smallest ad- 
 vantage to their own. For although it is evident that 
 the manner in which the private trade has been hitherto 
 conducted by the Company has been highly vexatious 
 to the merchant, the Company themselves do not pre- 
 tend to have derived any benefit from that vexation. 
 The mode of providing the freight, of distributing the 
 cargoes, of protracting the ships' sailing, has been, it is 
 true, inconvenient and burthensome to the trader, but 
 so far from drawing advantage from that inconvenience, 
 the Company have been equally sufferers by the ex- 
 pence and trouble they have incurred by it. Do they 
 demand indemnity -for desisting from unprofitable ty- 
 ranny ? It is surely sufficient answer to such a demand 
 on the part of the merchants, that if the Company 
 cease to inflict sufferings, they will at the same time 
 cease to suffer themselves. 
 
 But if the facts I have stated be accurate, it would 
 be more just that the Company and the IVivate Mer- 
 chants should change sides, and that the latter should 
 rather inquire of the former, what indemnity is due to 
 them from the Company for sacrificing the commercial 
 interests of the country to a narrow and bigotted spirit 
 of jealousy, for doing all in their power to cramp and 
 fetter trade committed by the Legislature to their fos- 
 tering care, for being perpetual defaulters in providing 
 the statutable tonnage they are bound to furnish ; for 
 enhancing the freight in some cases beyond all bounds, 
 and in others assigning it in miserable dismantled ves- 
 sels
 
 ( 49 ) 
 
 sels, equally incompatible with the intentions of Parlia- 
 ment and the prosperity of the trade. 
 
 The Directors of the East India Company are much 
 deceived if they imagine they can succeed before Par- 
 liament in setting, up a claim to the Government and 
 Commerce of India, as if it were a private inheritance, 
 to be managed upon any weak and ruinous principles 
 they may chuse to lay down to themselves. The 
 Company and the Public are partners even in the ex- 
 clusive trade, and though the same parties may be con- 
 sidered jointly interested for a time in the territories 
 and revenues of the British Empire, yet in the Public 
 is the sovereignty paramount and final reversion. The 
 Directors are no less trustees for the general commer- 
 
 u 
 
 cial interests of the Nation than of the Company, and 
 whether they injure one or the other, they equally vio- 
 late their trust. I am weary of hearing them dinning 
 in our ears their zeal for the Company as contradistin- . 
 guished from the nation, as if the interests of the one 
 were separable from those of the other j as if it was in 
 their power to make a bonfire of the surplus trade of 
 India as the Dutch do of their spices ; as if they 
 thought it either just or practicable to sacrifice the 
 whole commerce of the country to the monopoly of the 
 East India Company. 
 
 I repeat again, no detriment has arisen, or' can arise, 
 or has been stated to arise to the Company from the 
 Private Trade ; as to the apprehensions of colonisation, 
 which, most men of understanding believe to be abso- 
 lutely chimerical, if there be really any grounds for 
 them, Parliament are the best judges of them and of 
 
 E the
 
 ( 50 ) 
 
 the means of obviating them. This is merely a poli- 
 tical question, on which the Directors cannot for an in- 
 stant pretend a right to decide. The great question 
 relative to the employment of India shipping is partly 
 political, partly commercial, but the commercial part 
 bears relation to the general trade of Great Britain, 
 and not that of the Company. Whether the subjects 
 of this empire shall be permitted to carry on a traffic 
 authorised by Act of Parliament, and bring that por- 
 tion of the Indian commerce which the Company's ca- 
 pital cannot embrace, into the Thames, instead of its 
 being consigned to foreign ports, is the true point at 
 issue. It is a point of too much importance to be given 
 up to the Aristocracy of Leadenhall-strect, however 
 extensive their power and patronage may be; the private 
 trade even at this time occupies more than 15,000 tons 
 of shipping, and produces five millions sterling annually. 
 It needs no strong spirit of prophecy to foretel that if 
 the India Company will not voluntarily permit the 
 means to be used for bringing this immense mass of 
 wealth into England, the Legislature will speedily com- 
 pel them. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN. 
 London, Feb. 13, 1802. 
 
 LETTER
 
 LETTER X. 
 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 IT is necessary to call your attention to the few docu- 
 ments which the Court of Directors allow to be offici- 
 ally communicated to you on the question of Private 
 Trade. I have already made some remarks upon 
 their Resolution agreed to at a Secret Court held on 
 the 25th of November ; and I shall to-day lay before 
 you a letter from the Chairman (who is considered to 
 speak the sentiments of the Court of Directors) of an 
 earlier date, addressed to the Chancellor of his Ma- 
 jesty's Exchequer ; its contents are very curious, and 
 the observations that naturally suggest themselves upon 
 a perusal of it would lead me much beyond the limits 
 I can expect in a daily publication ; I shall, therefore, 
 satisfy myself for the present with submitting to you 
 the letter itself, with a few remarks upon the earliest 
 part of it. 
 
 You will perceive that it was written under the ap- 
 prehension of this subject being discussed in the House 
 of Commons ; and the Chairman feels it his duty to 
 press on the attention of Mr. Addington, how impossi- 
 ble it appears that any satisfactory result can be the con- 
 sequence of such a mode of proceeding, and on what 
 he grounds this opinion is not stated ; but it cannot 
 be on past experience, even with respect to the Compa- 
 ny ; because, in the most complicated and difficult 
 stages of their existence, they have been brought before 
 Parliament, where they have sometimes been seasonably 
 relieved in their distresses ; sometimes they have been. 
 
 E 2 restrained 
 
 f
 
 ( 53 ) 
 
 restrained from pursuing measures manifestly prejudicial 
 to the interests of themselves and the public ; and at 
 others they have been compelled to adopt a line of con- 
 duct evidently beneficial to the general interests they are 
 entrusted with. If such consequences have frequently 
 resulted already from parliamentary inquiries, what is 
 it that makes such a mode of proceeding in this in- 
 stance so clearly inefficient ? Have not preceding oc- 
 currences been equally, or indeed more, complicated 
 than the present r And do we not daily see the most in- 
 tricate cases come before the House of Commons in 
 every branch of commerce and legislation dependant on 
 this Government, where they are discussed in Com- 
 mittee with unremitting patience, with the most cir- 
 cumspect impartiality, and with the happiest effect ? I 
 trust, that instead of agreeing to the Chairman's opi- 
 nion, which is founded neither upon particular or gene- 
 ral experience, but which hastily impeaches the com- 
 petency of Parliament, many of you will agree with 
 me, that this subject can be investigated no where so 
 fully, so fairly, and so effectually, as it will be by the 
 Legislature itself, The parties will then have nothing 
 to influence their Judges, but the real merits of their 
 case ; the question will no longer have any thing of 
 personality attached or imputed to it j nor will any of 
 those who are to decide upon it be governed by the in- 
 fluence of private friendships or interests, or of favours 
 received, or favours expected. 
 
 The disingenuous manner in which the claims of the 
 merchants are represented in this letter, the alarm 
 which it endeavours to create in the mind of the Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer, and the various insinuations 
 
 with
 
 ( 53 
 
 with which it is filled for the purpose of prepossessing 
 the opinion of the Minister previous to the discussion of 
 Sir William Pulteney's motion in the House of Com- 
 mons, cannot escape your observation j but I propose to 
 make some further comments on those points in a few 
 days ; and in the mean time I entreat most earnestly 
 that you will read with particular attention this curious 
 letter. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN. 
 London, Feb. 21, 1802. 
 
 '" SIR, 7th Nov. Mansfield-street, Saturday Evening. 
 
 t( I YESTERDAY evening received an intimation from 
 Sir William Pulteney, of his intention to give notice in 
 the House of Commons on Monday, that he should on 
 the Wednesday following make a motion on the subject 
 of East India Affairs. 
 
 " Were I to consult my own personal ease, I should 
 rejoice that the very complicated subject, the claims of 
 Private Traders to and from India, were to be discus- 
 sed in the House of Commons, of which I have not the 
 honour to be a Member ; but as Chairman of the East 
 India Company, I have felt it my duty to press on your 
 attention, how impossible it appears that any satisfacto- 
 ry result can be the consequence of such a mode of pro- 
 ceeding. To undefined claims urged before the Legisla- 
 ture on ground of political expediency, the East India 
 Company, I apprehend, are compelled to oppose their 
 rights i founded on a deliberate compact with the public, 
 after a laborious and minute discussion, confirmed by 
 Parliament. The rights of Private Traders, and also 
 the mode in which those rights shall be enjoyed, form a 
 
 E 3 part
 
 ( 54 ) 
 
 part of that compact, and these stipulations are minutely 
 detailed and ratified by the Act of 1793. If these fhall 
 be violated without the consent or concurrence of the 
 East India Company, I profess myself at a loss to con- 
 ceive, how any rights can remain to them or to other 
 bodies of men, dependant upon the public faith. The 
 exclusive trade to and from India has been secured to 
 the Company for a limited period by the plighted faith 
 of Parliament, subject: to limitations and restrictions 
 minutely specified in the Act of 1793. These were 
 adopted under the impressions of public interests and 
 private rights, which Ministers and Parliament received 
 at that period. The term is not at present half expired j 
 and if, from a different view of public or private inte- 
 rests, the rights of the Company may be narrowed, they 
 may also be overturned ; and it must be understood in 
 future that those who form compacts with the State, hold 
 what they have understood to be rights during the good 
 pleasure of Parliament. 
 
 " You, Sir, who must be strongly impressed with the 
 great exertions made by the East India Company, and 
 a large expenditure of their property incurred, during the 
 arduous contest in which the nation has been engaged, 
 will, I flatter myself, concur in thinking that the first 
 dawn of Peace, and of opening prospect of re-establish- 
 ment of their affairs, necessarily deranged by their efforts 
 in the public service, is a time rather ungraciously chosen 
 for this attempt. I need not suggest to your enlighten- 
 ed mind the danger which may result to the government 
 of India, now become so important a part of the Em- 
 pire, by a too curious inquisition into the present state 
 
 of
 
 ( 55 ) 
 
 of their affairs, just emerging from the distress of an 
 eight-years war. 
 
 " At the same time I am sensible that the East India 
 Company are strongly implicated with the Public 
 Government of the Country, and that it may appear 
 equally ungracious on their part to oppose legal rights 
 in the rigid letter of their compact to any reasonable 
 change which the public interest may seem to require ; 
 but it cannot escape your observation, that the changes 
 made on such a principle must be the result of mutual 
 and friendly discussion ; and I believe I speak the sen- 
 timents of the Court of Directors in professing myself 
 ready to concur in any measure which may, after dis- 
 cussion, appear consistent with the higher and more 
 important public interest the safety and security of the 
 British Possessions in India. While the Government 
 of these Possessions shall be conducted on the present 
 plan, which I presume to think wisely chosen by the 
 Legislature, the financial property of the Company 
 must be essential to their safety, and this cannot exist 
 if the beneficial commerce shall be transferred to 
 others, and the burthens only thrown upon the Com- 
 pany. 
 
 " I cannot close this letter without returning you my 
 thanks, for the candid and even friendly manner in which 
 you have been pleased to receive my observations, in 
 the various conversations with which I have been ho- 
 noured. If, therefore, I again presume to trouble you, 
 I request it may be attributed to its true cause, the 
 anxiety which my public situation inspires, and to a 
 sincere desire that any arrangements which the public 
 
 E 4 inteieft
 
 ( 56 ) 
 
 interest may really require, should not be impeded 
 by the manner in which the business shall be con- 
 ducted. 
 
 " I have the honour to be, &c. &c. 
 
 (Signed) "CHARLES MILLS. 
 
 " Right Honorable Henry Addington, fyc. fyc." 
 
 LETTER XL 
 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 JlT is much to be lamented, that in debating the sub- 
 ject of Private Trade, any mode of argument should 
 be resorted to which is not candid and liberal, and 
 founded on the fair principle of ascertaining what plan 
 for conducting it is really most beneficial to the East 
 India Company and to the Nation. But it is still more 
 to be regretted that the Court of Directors should be 
 the party to deviate from such a rule, and one cannot 
 well conceive an adequate cause for their being betrayed 
 into any thing like partial reasoning, or disingenuous 
 representation. Nevertheless, such a spirit has mani- 
 fested itself, and is particularly apparent in the letter 
 from the Chairman to the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 which I introduced to your notice in my last address, 
 and on which I shall now take the liberty to make a few 
 comments. 
 
 After asserting, that it is impossible any satisfactory 
 result can be the consequence of bringing the matter 
 into Parliament, he says, " To undefined claims urged 
 " before the Legislature on ground of political expedi- 
 4T tncy, the East India Company are compelled to op- 
 
 (( posq
 
 ( 57 ) 
 
 <c pose their rights, founded on a deliberate compact 
 *' with the public." This is, surely, not only an un- 
 fair but an unjust representation of the case ; for, the 
 claims of the merchants are clearly defined to be founded 
 on that very Act of 1793, to which the Chairman re- 
 fers in a few lines farther; and, instead of being urged 
 on the general grounds of political expediency, they 
 are preferred for the particular purpose of obtaining 
 redress from the Legislature on a specific subject, on 
 which they alledge, and the Directors have acknow- 
 ledged it t that the beneficent intentions of Parliament 
 towards them have been frustrated by the Court of 
 Directors. 
 
 The Chairman then proceeds, c< The rights of Private 
 " Traders, and also the mode in which those rights 
 " shall be enjoyed, form a part of that compact, and 
 <c these stipulations are minutely detailed and ratified 
 " by the Act of 1793." How different is this from 
 the language he used not three lines before ! Instead 
 of undefined claims, here are rights acknowledged by 
 mutual compact j and here the parties are placed, as 
 they ought to be, on the same ground, namely, on that 
 of an Act of Parliament, and the intent and meaning of 
 this Act are the principal cause of appeal to the Legis- 
 lature. The letter continues, " If these stipulations 
 <r shall be violated without the consent or concurrence of 
 tc the East India Company, I profess myself at a loss 
 " to conceive how any rights can remain to them, or 
 (f to other bodies of men, dependant upon the public 
 " faith." If they be violated, it must be without the 
 consent of the East India Company, for otherwise I am 
 at a loss to conceive how they can be violated at all j 
 
 and
 
 ( 58 ) 
 
 and if Parliament ever should violate the rights of one 
 set of subjects, which, by the bye, is neither a very 
 respectful nor a very loyal supposition, it will be a 
 pretty sure sign that no such thing as right will be left 
 o the rest. 
 
 The Chairman goes on, <c If, from a different view 
 " of public or private interests, the rights of the Com- 
 " pany may be narrowed, they may also be overturned ; 
 " and it must be understood in future, that those who 
 s< form compaffs with the State, hold what they have un- 
 " derstood to be rights, during the GOOD PLEASURE of 
 Cf Parliament." This is a petulant and ill-advised sen- 
 tence. It has more the style of a person who had 
 heated his imagination with reading the social contract, 
 and was pleading for the rights of compaci founded on 
 that wild system, than the language of the head of a 
 public body in England treating on the power of its 
 Parliament. 
 
 If, from a different view of public or private inte- 
 rests, and from a change of circumstances the Legisla- 
 ture think it more conducive to the general welfare of 
 the nation to alter the relative situation of the Company, 
 it will assuredly do so ; it did so, in the commercial 
 treaty with America; and shall any Corporation presume 
 to say, because it does so, it has any idea of overturning 
 the rights of every chartered body in the kingdom ? the in- 
 sinuation is indecent, and the expression very objec- 
 tionable , in the present instance it is still more, for it 
 is unjust too. It was not in the contemplation of the 
 merchants to desire the rights of the Company might 
 even be narrowed i they only request their own may be 
 secured, and such further indulgence granted as Parlia- 
 ment
 
 ( 59 ) 
 
 merit in its wisdom may think proper, consistent with 
 the exclusive privileges of the Company. The acception 
 of the phrase "good pleasure*' (which concludes the 
 sentence above quoted,) as it is there used, implies 
 something of a sneer, and infers that any thing which 
 is so held, is enjoyed at the precarious will of another. 
 This sort of language applied to a British Parliament, 
 and addressed to a British Minister, is very indecorous, 
 and shows either a want of knowledge of the nature and 
 power of Parliament, or a want of respect for its au- 
 thority. If by f( good pleasure of Parliament'* be meant 
 the will of Parliament, all our rights are held by this 
 tenure. " The power find jurisdiction of Parliament, 
 " (says Sir Edward Coke) is so transcendent and abso- 
 f< lute, that it cannot be confined either for causes or per- 
 <c sons within any bounds.** " It hath, (says Judge 
 <c Blackstone,) sovereign and uncontroulable authority in 
 " the making^ confirming, enlarging, restraining, abrogat- 
 <f ing, repealing, reviving, and expounding of laws con- 
 ft cerning matters of all possible denominations.'* And 
 when a body of merchants shall make a respectful ap- 
 peal to this high power, and pray it to exercise one of 
 its essential functions, shall this Constitutional Act be 
 represented as an attempt to violate the law, and shall 
 that power be reviled as if it were an instrument in the 
 hand of the Minister to be used at his arbitrary will, or, 
 in the phrase of the Chairman, at his good pleasure ? 
 Whoever dictated this language, did not consider what 
 was due from the Chairman of the East India Com- 
 pany, to the Minister of the King, and to the British 
 Parliament. 
 
 In pretty much the same style the letter proceeds : 
 
 " That
 
 ( 60 ) 
 
 " That the first dawn of peace and of opening prospect 
 " of re-establishment of their (the Company's) affairs, 
 " necessarily deranged by their efforts in the public 
 <c service, is a time rather ungraciously chosen for this 
 " attempt." To this ironical, and so far improper pas- 
 sage, I take leave to observe, that the Directors, in their 
 memorial addressed to the Lords of the Treasury in 
 May 1797, state in direct terms, that this very trade, 
 which the Chairman now presents as a violation of their 
 ' ' rights, ha s already led to consequences most beneficial to the 
 " British nation." In another part of it they say, <f its 
 tc advantages cannot come within calculation -," and they 
 express great anxiety to have it settled then, because 
 they apprehend a decrease of the Indian trade to England 
 when peace shall take place $ hence it would appear 
 that at one time the Directors are all eagerness for this 
 plan, and speak of it as the greatest benefit which can 
 be conferred on the Nation and the Company ; at ano- 
 ther time, and that in the short space of four years, their 
 Chairman deprecates it as an outrageous attack on their 
 rights, and on those of every Corporation in the king- 
 /\ dom. At one time, peace is the period of all others 
 when this plan will be most advantageous ; at another, 
 peace is the worst, or in the Chairman's words, the 
 most ungracious period that could have been chosen. 
 According to these different opinions, the merchants 
 will find all times unsuitable to the Court of Directors, 
 and such a contrariety of sentiments affords the strongest 
 plea for the merchants to appeal to the steady wisdom 
 of the Legislature. 
 
 The letter continues, " I need not suggest to your 
 c enlightened mind the dangers ivhich may result to the 
 
 lc Government
 
 ( 61 ) 
 
 " Government cf India by a loo curious inquisition into the 
 " present state of their affairs, just emerging from the dis- 
 ct tress of an eight years war." This is a hint to alarm 
 the Minister, no doubt j but it is a hint that should 
 alarm us Proprietors a great deal more ; for, as we 
 certainly do not possess so enlightened a mind, espe- 
 cially on this subject, as the Chairman gives the Minister 
 credit for, it is natural for us to wish for a little of that 
 illumination which the Chairman, doubtless, can confer 
 upon us : And if a too curious inquisition into the pre- 
 sent state of our affairs be dangerous, I own I am ra- 
 ther curious to know in what the danger consists. If 
 they be in such a state that it is dangerous to look into 
 them too narrowly, they must be in a very extraordi- 
 nary state indeed. In the ordinary occurrences of life, 
 and particularly in mercantile affairs, the more narrow- 
 ly they are looked after the better ; and the usual re- 
 medy for danger is to look with special care into them, 
 and to see what means can be applied to remove the 
 disorder.. But it would seem, from this expression ot 
 the Chairman, that there are degrees of inquisitiveness 
 and that you may inquire to a certain step, but on no 
 account must you proceed further; for if you are too 
 curious, you will ruin every thing. It is a great mercy 
 that our affairs are in the hands of such enlightened men 
 as our present worthy Chairman and his coadjutors, 
 who know exactly where inquiry should stop, and can 
 say, " thus far shah thou go, and no further." But 
 are they sure that this mode of reasoning will satisfy the 
 Proprietors, and that some of the unenlightened may 
 not say, if there be such imminent danger as you state, 
 tell us what it is ? We do not think danger is to be 
 
 overcome
 
 ( 62 ) 
 
 overcome by shutting our eyes to it. We rather think 
 the safer course is to meet it manfully, to oppose it 
 with all our force, to examine into its nature and 
 extent, to inquire into its cause, and guard against its 
 effect. In a word, if the Company's affairs are in a 
 dangerous state, it is high time they should be looked 
 into, and I so far differ with the Chairman, that I 
 think, in such a state, the inquisition can not be too 
 curious. 
 
 The last part which I shall notice in this memorable 
 letter is this tc the financial property of the Company 
 c< must be essential to their safety," no doubt, "and 
 c< this cannot exist if the beneficial commerce shall be 
 " transferred to other s t and the burthens only thrown 
 *' upon the Company." What is here meant, I freely 
 acknowledge is beyond the powers of my comprehen- 
 sion. I hope it is far otherwise with the enlightened 
 mind of the illustrious statesman to whom it is ad- 
 dressed. I have always understood the beneficial part 
 of the trade was that which, by way of pre-eminence, 
 is called the Company's investment ; and that the great 
 advantage of their exclusive privilege was, that these 
 goods were absolutely denied to others, and preserved 
 inviolably for them. I have also understood, that the 
 trade for which the merchants solicit is, that in which 
 the Company do not deal; and that the express condition 
 on which they are allowed to trade at all is, that they 
 shall not interfere with the Company's investment. 
 How then is this transfer of property to be accounted 
 for ? It has never, to my knowledge, made any part 
 of the petitions of the merchants to be indulged with a 
 share of the Company's investment, or to infringe, in 
 
 any
 
 ( C3 ) 
 
 any degree, their exclusive privileges. Where or 
 whence has this exchange of property been conjured 
 up ? Surely the Chairman does not mean that the 
 merchants are now in possession of all the beneficial 
 commerce, and that the burthens are thrown upon the 
 Company ; for, then the Directors are to blame in suf- 
 fering such an invasion of their rights, and such a fraud 
 on their property ; and so they will be, if it ever 
 should happen. Whatever the meaning may be, the 
 expression is most extraordinary, and requires the ex- 
 planation of an abler head than mine : Davus sum, non 
 Oedipus. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN. 
 London, Feb. 27, 1802. 
 
 LETTER XII. 
 
 To the Proprietors of East India Stock. 
 
 X AM glad at last to find some clew to account for 
 this unexampled delay on the subject of Private Trade. 
 Nine months have now elapsed since the Directors re- 
 ceived their instructions from the Court of Proprietors, 
 during which time you have not heard a syllable from 
 your Executive Body respecting this long extended de- 
 mur to the performance of your wishes as well as theirs; 
 From other quarters something has been ascertained: 
 it was shewn in the House of Commons on the 25th 
 of November last, that the Directors, entirely un- 
 mindful of your orders, had taken upon themselves to 
 enter into a negociation with the Secretary of the 
 Treasury ; and that they had gone the length of sug- 
 gesting
 
 ( 64 ) 
 
 gesting propositions (differing very widely from what 
 you had approved), to be the basis of a future arrange- 
 ment. The regularity of such a proceeding with re- 
 ference to the Board of Commissioners, I shall not at 
 present stop to examine. The clew to which I allude, 
 is the second edition of Mr. Henchman's Observations 
 on the East India Trade, which is just published ; in 
 the preface he says, " I am not aware that there is 
 " any probability of an amicable adjustment between 
 <c the India Company and the Private Merchants, 
 <c although some propositions, intended to answer that 
 " end, were not long ago brought forward by the Chan- 
 " cellor of his Majesty's Exchequer ; coming from so 
 " high a quarter I have paid that respectful attention to 
 11 them which they demanded; but I am sorry to say 
 fl they appear to me, (especially when connected with 
 f< a secret resolution of the Court of Directors on the 
 * f 25th of November last) calculated only to embar- 
 " rass and distress the merchant, and to load the Com- 
 ft pany with a multiplicity of engagements that must 
 * c terminate in a large pecuniary loss;" and he gives a 
 copy of the propositions, with the observations of the 
 Agents upon them in his appendix. From this you 
 may learn, that very strong objections are raised against 
 thofe propositions ; and from the delay it is not unfair 
 to infer that some important difficulties have arisen in 
 consequence. Having taken upon me of late to watch 
 a little over the circumstances and progress of this bu- 
 siness, I have perused those remarks of the Agents with 
 attention ; and as they appear to be deserving of your 
 serious consideration, I have desired they may be an- 
 nexed
 
 ( 65 ) 
 
 nexed to this letter, together with the proposition to 
 which they apply. 
 
 From this point I could wish to draw your attention 
 to the trade of foreigners with the British settlements 
 in the East Indies. However ungraciously chosen, the 
 Chairman of the India Company may conceive the first 
 dawn of peace to be for the regulation of the East In- 
 dia trade, it may appear to others, as it does to me, 
 that since the Directors had delayed the arrangements 
 that were wanted until peace came suddenly upon them, 
 it is now the more indispensibly necessary that it should 
 be speedily determined, on what plan this trade is in 
 future to be prosecuted : at present the English mer- 
 chants are held in suspence j are calumniated by the 
 Directors ; and are threatened with restraints that must 
 lead them to other channels of commerce for the em- 
 ployment of their capitals ; while the foreigners of 
 every country are planning adventures to the British 
 possessions in Asia, access to which is denied to none 
 but the subjects of that Sovereign to whom the terri- 
 tories belong. How often have the India Company 
 been called on to declare what part of the commerce 
 of India they can monopolize : and, according to the 
 spirit of their Charter, to give all reasonable facilities 
 and encouragement to the Private Merchants to carry 
 on the remainder ? It is not my intention to go over 
 that ground again, but, I wish to warn you, that whilst 
 our Rulers are so dilatory, all our neighbours art not 
 only fitting out their own ships, but even buying ours, 
 for the purpose of entering into competition with G it 
 Britain for the Trade of India. Every nation has al- 
 ready dispatched, or is on the point of dispatching, their 
 
 F ships
 
 ( 66 ) 
 
 ships for that part of the world; and if, in the year 
 1791, after eighr years peace, and under the apprehen- 
 sions of the revolution, one sale at L'Orient could 
 amount to 1,228,000!. (for which we have the autho- 
 rity of our own Directors) what may not be expected at 
 this time, when the French manufactures are in a state 
 of ruin; and all importations from foreign countries 
 have been prevented, by the vigilance and superiority 
 of our Meets during the whole of the late war. 
 
 Besides these active competitors in Europe, we have 
 another, whose friendship may be valuable, if the pur- 
 chase is not too dear; and that is America possessing 
 all the energy and commercial enterprize of English- 
 men, from whom they sprung, and by whose capital 
 they have been supported, they are eagerly availing 
 themselves of the terms of a treaty, dictated by the 
 emergencies of the hour in which it was negociated, 
 with a degree of diligence and activity highly creditable 
 to them as merchants. Their ships are to be found in 
 all parts of India in numbers, though not in magnitude 
 equal to our own; and a marine is by these means cre- 
 ating, that will at a future day be formidable to any 
 European State to which they may be inimical. At 
 present their attention is directed only to commercial 
 objects ; they are occupied at China in the purchase of 
 teas to be smuggled into England; at Bengal, in the 
 conveyance of the valuable manufactures of that country 
 to every port in the North or in the South of Europe, 
 that is open to them; and at Bombay, in the transpor- 
 tation of cotton, even to this country, to give employ- 
 ment to the British weaver. It is a fat well ascer- 
 tained, that within these few months many American 
 
 ships
 
 ( 67 ) 
 
 ships have been upon the coast of Malabar for cargoes 
 of cotton, and made no scruple of declaring that they 
 were intended for the English market; and this, while 
 the British resident merchant is told that he must be in- 
 terdicted from loading his ships in the same pursuit. 
 
 It is improbable that the Proprietors of East India 
 Stock can much longer believe it is for their interest all 
 this should be upheld and encouraged by their Direc- 
 tors. It is impossible that the Ministers of the country 
 can much longer delay to apply an effectual remedy to 
 a case so urgent and so clear. 
 
 AN ENGLISHMAN. 
 London. March 6, 1802. 
 
 F a EAST
 
 EAST INDIA PRIVATE TRADE. 
 
 The 'following are the Papers referred to in the 
 last Letter of the ENGLISHMAN. 
 
 THE 
 
 ELEVEN PROPOSITIONS 
 Read by His Majesty's CHAN- 
 CELLOR OF THE EXCHE- 
 QUER in the HOUSE OF 
 COMMONS, as received from 
 tke Cturt of Directors. 
 
 i. THAT in addition to the 
 quantity of three thousand tons 
 of shipping, now annually al- 
 lotted to the exports of indivi- 
 duals from India, three, four, 
 or five thousand ton* more, or 
 as much as may be wanted, 
 shall be assigned". 
 
 a. That the shipping to be 
 thus annually employed shall 
 be wholly applied to the use of 
 Private Traders, and shall nei- 
 ther be destined nor detained 
 for political or warlike services 
 in India, but sail from thence 
 
 OBSERVATIONS 
 By the AGENTS upon the PRO- 
 POSITIONS. 
 
 i. WHATEVER quantity of 
 tonnage is sent from England 
 by the Court of Directors will 
 always go to India at great un- 
 certainty. It may be redun- 
 dant, or it may be insufficient; 
 and it cannot be ready at all 
 times when the Merchants may 
 find it beneficial to engage in 
 an adventure to Europe. 
 
 2. The ships are hereby re- 
 strained to sail at fixed periods 
 within the fair weather season. 
 This Trade cannot be confined 
 to the fair weather season with 
 any hopes of success j it is by 
 expedition and short voyages 
 
 only
 
 ( 69 ) 
 
 dire&ly for the port of Lon- only that the Private Trade 
 don, at fixed periods within can prosper. It is well known 
 the fair weather season. the Company have certain sea- 
 
 sons for their own trade, and 
 they seem determined to con- 
 fine the Private Trade to the 
 same periods; whereas it is 
 equally well known one great 
 advantage to private specula- 
 tions is, that they can sail at 
 any time that the weather will 
 admit; and that they do and 
 will sail almost at all seasons / 
 of the year. If underwriters x 
 i are willing to insure the ships, 
 and pilots and able officers are 
 ready to navigate them, in or- 
 der to insure success to com- 
 mercial engagements, the times 
 of putting to sea must be left 
 to their prudence; otherwise/^ 
 all the benefit of expedition and 
 eeconomy is lost. It is by being 
 free from such restraints that 
 the Americans make a voyage 
 to and from the East Indies 
 within twelve months j while 
 ships taken up by the Compa- 
 ny, and subject to their fair 
 weather seasons and other cau- 
 ses of delay, will be twenty, or ^ 
 four and twenty months, from 
 the day they are engaged to the 
 day they are discharged. No 
 Private Trade can prosper un- 
 der such discouragement. 
 F 3 3
 
 3, That all commodities of 
 the produce of the Continent, 
 or of the British territories in 
 India, shall be permitted to be 
 laden on those ships, excepting 
 only piece goods, which shall 
 not be laden unless by special 
 licence from the Company or 
 their Governments abroad ; 
 and saltpetre, which any of the 
 Governments in India shall 
 have the power to prohibit or 
 restrain. 
 
 4. That the goods to be ex- 
 ported on private account be as 
 now received into the Compa- 
 ny's warehouses in India, and 
 that the same care be taken in 
 assorting them into cargoes, in 
 due proportions of light and 
 heavy goods, according to the 
 deliveries into ths warehouses, 
 as is observed in forming the 
 Company's own cargoes. 
 
 3. The Agents beg to state, 
 that they understand the Mer- 
 chants at present have liberty 
 to trade in every article except 
 tea, nankeens, and China raw 
 silk, to which the Company 
 now confine their monopoly ; 
 and in regard to piece goods 
 and saltpetre, the Agents con- 
 ceive the Merchants can have 
 no objection to the terms upon 
 which the Directors propose 
 they may be allowed to import 
 those articles. 
 
 4. This article is replete 
 with distress and inconveni- 
 ence to every Private Mer- 
 chant. He cannot form any 
 probable idea of what light or 
 heavy goods may be sent into 
 the Company's warehouses ; 
 the merchants being allowed no 
 concert with respect to their 
 cargoes, each person being ex- 
 pected to send in his goods, 
 whatever they may be j and 
 whenever chance shall have so 
 decided, that a suitable quan- 
 tity of light and heavy goods 
 are collected -together to com- 
 plete a cargo, a ship may then 
 be loaded j for these ships are 
 " to be wholly applied to the 
 c< use of Private Traders." 
 (Vide Article 2d.) But if it 
 should
 
 71 ) 
 
 should so happen, that any 
 three or four Merchants shoujd 
 agree upon what they thought 
 an assorted cargo, here is no 
 assurance that such goods 
 would afterwards be allowed 
 to be laden on one and the same 
 ship. The Company's officers 
 might choose to dispose of these 
 goods in different vessels, there- 
 by defeating the object of the 
 Merchants, and embarrassing 
 them in their insurances, by 
 not knowing in what ships 
 their risk might ultimately be, 
 and at what periods their cor- 
 respondents in Europe might 
 expect their consignments ; for 
 in such cases, which must oo 
 cur from the proposed arrange- 
 ment, much delay will inter- 
 vene j and what may be sent 
 into the Company's ware- 
 houses, as an assorted cargo, 
 by several merchants in the 
 month of July (and which, if 
 left to the management of those 
 individuals, would leave India 
 in August) would be ^liable, 
 from a different way of think- 
 ing in the Company's ware- 
 house-keepers, to be detained 
 till towards Christmas j and 
 then only be transmitted in 
 different vessels during the fair 
 weather season, which conti- 
 F 4 nucs
 
 ( 72 ) 
 
 nues to March. By this mode 
 of proceeding the best concert- 
 ed plans of commerce would be 
 defeated, all industry and ex- 
 ertion checked, and the most 
 earnest endeavours to get to an 
 early market be rendered of no 
 avail. 
 
 5. That these goods shall be 5. To this there can be no 
 brought to the Company's objection, as it is conformable 
 warehouses in London, and to the Adi of 1793. 
 thence to their sales in the re- 
 gular order, subject to the 
 charge of 3 per cent, now al- 
 lowed to the Company for 
 landing, warehousing, and sel- 
 ling private goods. 
 
 6. That when the private 
 goods provided for exportation 
 from India shall not serve to 
 fill all the ships sent out for 
 them, the Company shall put 
 gruff goods into these ships on 
 their own account. 
 
 6. This article requires no 
 observation from the Agents. 
 
 7. That no person shall be 
 permitted to embark in this 
 trade as Principal or Agent, 
 except such as may lawfully 
 engage therein, according to 
 the provisions of the Act of the 
 33d of Geo. III. cap. 52. 
 
 7. Merchants, natives of In- 
 dia, often engage in this com- 
 merce. Is it meant by this 
 Resolution that they are to be 
 prohibited from trading to Lon- 
 don ? for they are not expressly 
 mentioned in the Act of the 
 33d George III. 
 
 8, This
 
 ( 73 ) 
 
 8. That the ships to be em- 8. This proposition appears 
 ployed in this service shall be to be calculated to drive all 
 
 built for the purpose, either in 
 Great Britain or India, the 
 Company contracting with 
 those who shall undertake to 
 build or be the owners of them, 
 for their service during eight 
 voyages ; and that the construc- 
 tion of them shall be agreeable 
 to a plan already adopted by 
 the Company in England, for 
 ships intended to carry their 
 own gruff goods. 
 
 teak or India-built ships from 
 the Trade between India and 
 London.- In the opinion of 
 the Agents, the Merchants in 
 India cannot find it conveni- 
 ent to contract with the Com- 
 pany for eight voyages. In the 
 first place, the legality of such 
 engagements is much ques- 
 tioned. In the second, it is an 
 operation requiring a much 
 longer term than any Mer- 
 chant in India may wish to be 
 bound down to. In the third 
 place, they would be at an un- 
 certainty as to the Comman- 
 ders and Officers the Direc- 
 tors would approve ; the or- 
 ders to India, when seen, may 
 explain this : in the fourth 
 place, they would labour un- 
 der great alarm for any facility 
 that might be necessary, while 
 their ships were in England ; 
 from the determined hostility 
 of the Directors both to the 
 Merchants and Agents fifth- 
 ly, they know not what con- 
 struction it is that the Compa- 
 ny has adopted for their own 
 ships to carry gruff goods; or 
 whether it would suit the Mer- 
 chants to build such ships in 
 the Ganges, At any rate such 
 ships.
 
 ( 74 ) 
 
 ships would not be proper for 
 the Trade of Bombay and Su- 
 rat. How, for instance, is the 
 Company to provide against 
 the occurrence of circu instances 
 similar to the present hour ? 
 Last year the crops of cotton, 
 which is a very bulky article, 
 entirely failed j of course ships 
 destined for that purpose would 
 not be occupied. This year, 
 by the last advices, the culti- 
 vators of cotton have increased 
 their plantations amazingly, 
 and the appearances are very 
 fair indeed ; in consequence of 
 this the Merchants may wish 
 to send large quantities to Lon- 
 don j but there are many other 
 circumstances besides the plen- 
 ty of cotton which may influ- 
 ence the Merchants; and of 
 which the Directors cannot 
 have timely notice to judge. In 
 what quantity would they send 
 out tonnage this year ? In short 
 it is impossible to decide in 
 London, what tonnage the Pri- 
 vate Trade of India may from 
 time to time require ; and great 
 loss must be incurred by 
 those who attempt it. Sixthly, 
 it might often be difficult to 
 fit out and equip ships accord- 
 ing to the precise rules of the 
 Company. Seventhly, in case 
 
 of
 
 75 ) 
 
 of sickness or death, it would 
 cause Merchants to be obliged 
 to leave engagements, upon 
 long periods, depending: or to 
 dispose of them at great loss. 
 Eighthly, it may be deserving 
 of consideration on the part of 
 the Company, how far it may 
 be prudent for them to enter 
 into contracts for ships for a 
 great number of voyages, in a 
 Trade that they have described 
 to be so very precarious, as is 
 set forth in Mr. C. Grant's 
 report. 
 
 9. That, in order to ascer- 
 tain the rates at which ships of 
 this construction, built of teak, 
 can be obtained for eight voy- 
 ages certain in India, the 
 Court will authorize their Go- 
 vernments there immediately 
 to advertise for such a number 
 of ships of the above descrip- 
 tion as are likely to be icquir- 
 ed, and to engage them for the 
 Company, provided the freight 
 demanded shall not exceed the 
 rate of those lately contracted 
 for in England. 
 
 9. It is a difficult matter to 
 make the necessary remarks on 
 this article j because the Di- 
 rectors have not stated the 
 number of ships likely to be 
 required ; nor the rates at 
 which they have lately con- 
 traded in England. How is 
 it possible, indeed, to ascertain 
 with any degree of certainty 
 what number of ships may be 
 wanted? It may vary consi- 
 derably one year from another j 
 yet the Company is to burden 
 themselves with an established 
 fleet of ships for a term much 
 beyond their exclusive Char- 
 ter. It is true also that the 
 Company have lately engaged 
 ships at 14!. per ton peace 
 freight 3 but they have allowed 
 those
 
 10. Or ships already built 
 in India may be tendered to the 
 Governments in India, for two 
 or more voyages, for the pur- 
 pose of carrying the private 
 trade, if they shall not exceed 
 the rate of peace freight actual- 
 ly paid by the Company for 
 ships of the like description 
 this season ; and provided they 
 are in all respects approved by 
 their Master-attendants or o- 
 ther proper officers in India. 
 
 76 ) 
 
 those ships 3!. per ton in the 
 building, and home demurrage 
 (that is while they are unem- 
 ployed) of three-pence per ton 
 per dayj these circumstances 
 Lead to an intricate calcula- 
 tion ; and the Directors may 
 state the value of them at one 
 sum, individuals may rate them 
 at another. What good pur- 
 pose such a system was to an- 
 swer to the Company is not our 
 present inquiry: it is sufficient 
 to shew that it evidently creates 
 an additional difficulty in such 
 a case as the present; whe- 
 ther the real freight is i61. 17!. 
 or 17!. i os. per ton remains 
 doubtful ; but it is not so, that 
 the Directors will so make use 
 of this doubt as to turn it to the 
 
 y 
 
 disadvantage of the Merchant. 
 
 10. This Article is calcu- 
 lated, like the preceding ones, 
 to keep the India-built ships 
 out of the trade. They are 
 to be ships of like description with 
 those the Company have engaged 
 this season. Every one knows 
 that India-built Ships differ so 
 much from Europe-built ships, 
 that under this requisition they 
 may be all excluded from em- 
 ploy ; and they are to be al- 
 lowed a freight settled by that 
 similarity
 
 ( 77 ) 
 
 Provided that nothing herein similarity. Here is room for 
 
 contained shall be construed to endless cavil. They are next 
 
 make void any contraft or agree- to be in all respetts approved by 
 
 ment into which the Company their Master - attendant. So 
 
 may have already entered \ or, that here again their employ 
 
 to prevent the Company from is to depend upon what orders 
 taking up hereafter, or con- 
 trailing to build ships in Great 
 
 Britain OR equal or more ad- 
 vantageous terms than those of 
 India. 
 
 ii. That the above ships 
 shall be re-let by the Compa- 
 ny, without profit, to such 
 Merchants as may be disposed 
 to export Goods to India, or to 
 import goods from India as 
 above-described, charging to 
 the exporter and importer re- 
 spectively fuch proportion only 
 of the total freight for the voy- 
 age as shall be due, according 
 
 the Company may please to 
 issue to their Master-atten- 
 dant ; he already knows what 
 their inclination is for the em- 
 ployment of these ships at all. 
 Then follows a proviso, 
 " That nothing herein con- 
 " tained shall be construed to 
 " make void any contrail or 
 " agreement into which the 
 u Company may have already 
 " entered." Of this there is 
 no possible means of forming 
 any judgment. It evidently 
 leads to some further check 
 upon the free Merchants and 
 their ships, but it is purposely 
 involved in mystery. 
 
 ii. " The above ships (this 
 u Article says) are to be re-let 
 " by the Company , without pro- 
 "Jit, to such Merchants as 
 " may be disposed to export 
 " goods to India, or to import 
 " goods from India as above 
 " described." This is not the 
 most usual mode of expression 
 among Merchants, who, hav- 
 ing ships engaged for a term 
 
 of
 
 ( 78 ) 
 
 to the proportion established of years, advertise to take 
 by the At of 33d Geo. III. freight on board for their port 
 cap. 52. of destination : And in fact it 
 
 is intended in this instance ex- 
 pressly to provide against re- 
 letting the ship to the Mer- 
 chants : instead of which, the 
 Company will receive their 
 goods, lade, and transport them 
 at a fixed rate of freight, so that 
 the Merchant has no command 
 over the ship ; knows nothing 
 of the time of her dispatch, nor 
 the ports she is to touch at, or 
 what orders she sails under; 
 and frequently he will not 
 know, especially if he lives at 
 a distance from Calcutta, what 
 ship his goods may at last be 
 put on board : but he will 
 know, that there will be great 
 delay in her departure and 
 voyage ; that he will have a 
 heavier freight to pay than fo- 
 reigners ; and that he will suffer 
 further inconveniences, and 
 loss of time, before his goods 
 are put up to sale, and his pro- 
 perty at last realized; so that 
 every step in his adventure 
 (while he is restricted to ships 
 hired to the Company and not 
 re-let to the Merchant in toto 
 as often as he is willing so to 
 engage) is clogged by formali- 
 ties, inconveniences, and de- 
 lays
 
 79 ) 
 
 lays; is attended with expence 
 that might be avoided ; and is 
 altogether subject to such hin- 
 drances, and disadvantages, as 
 no trade carried on upon com- 
 mercial principles for a profit 
 can exist under. 
 
 It is therefore evident, un- 
 der all circumstances, that 
 these eleven Propositions can 
 produce no other effect, than to 
 indispose the Merchants of In- 
 dia towards the trade with 
 London ; and thereby re-esta- 
 blish the commerce of foreign 
 nations with British capital to 
 greater extent than ever.
 
 , 
 
 < 
 
 V '*
 
 27 35
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 University of California 
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 305 De Neve Drive - Parking Lot 17 Box 951388 
 
 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90095-1388 
 
 Return this material to the library from which it was borrowed. 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 AT 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 DS 
 
 The Englishman's 
 *2~ Letters Relative 
 1802 to ths Trade 
 Between Great 
 Britain and the 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 AA 000013871 9 
 
 DS 
 
 'J-63 
 A2P2 
 1802 
 v.l
 
 
 
 |ity of C 
 lern Reg 
 ary Fac