~'iew of the Contested 
 its in the Negotiation 
 Between Administration 
 
 the Directors of the 'i 
 
 India Company. . .
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 AT LOS ANGELES
 
 A VIEW 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CONTESTED POINTS 
 
 IN 
 
 THE NEGOTIATION 
 
 BETWEEN 
 
 ADMINISTRATION 
 
 j 
 
 AND THE 
 
 DIRECTORS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 EAST INDIA COMPANY, 
 
 ON THE SUBJECT OF THE RENEWAL OF 
 
 The Company's Charter ; 
 
 AS THEY STOOD ON THE NINTH OF APRIL, 1793. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED FOR J. DEBRETT, PICCADILLY 
 AND J. SEWELL, CORNHILL. 
 
 *793- 
 
 ' [Price One Shilling and Si
 
 A 
 
 VIEW 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CONTESTED POINTS, 
 
 THERE never was a crifis in the flate and 
 affairs of the Eaft India Company more 
 momentous than the prefent. The queftion they 
 have now depending is, whether they fhall con- 
 
 O 
 
 tinue to be lords over rich kingdoms, paying 
 ^ large revenues, maintaining numerous armies, 
 
 yielding the moft valuable articles of commerce; 
 whether they fhall continue to enjoy a regulated 
 monopoly of the immenfe trade carried on be- 
 tween Great Britain and the Eaft, and thus the 
 fineft commercial fleet the world ever faw, alfo 
 
 1 continue to be maintained ; whether the debts of 
 ^ 
 
 ? the Company fhall be put into a happy train of 
 
 T 
 
 "^liquidation, and the dividend of the Proprietors 
 A 2 be, 
 
 '354675
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 be, in the mean time, raifed to ten per cent., with 
 the brilliant and rational profpect of an annual ad- 
 dition to their capital befides, and that after paying 
 half a million yearly towards the public expence; 
 whether the interefts of the Company and the na- 
 tion (hall be thus cemented, and mutually confo- 
 lidated : In a word, whether the Company fhall 
 continue to hold a fituation far more fplendid in 
 refpecb to territorial dominion, commercial gran- 
 deur, vaft revenues, and extenfive patronage, than 
 fubjec~b of any other ftate, ancient or modern, ever 
 enjoyed j and, indeed, fuch as few fovereign 
 Hates could command j or whether, divefted of 
 territory and of exclufive privileges, reduced to 
 raife a trading capital from the ftockholders, ex- 
 pofed to innumerable rivals and difturbances in 
 every feat of their commerce : Incapable, in fhort, 
 as they would thus foon find themfelves of carrying 
 on trade whether their affairs fhall be brought to 
 a ftand, and the proprietors, inftead of continuing to 
 receive even the former dividend of eight per cent. t 
 which was a profit, (hall have to draw forth, by 
 degrees, dividends upon the capital, as the affets 
 t of
 
 ( s ) 
 
 of the Company, depreciated by its decline, can 
 be realized ? 
 
 This is, in effect, now the queftion. What- 
 ever may be faid, and faid even from mod re- 
 fpeftable authority, we hefitate not to declare our 
 firm conviction, that, in the poffefiion of an ex- 
 clufive charter, are involved all thofe effential 
 interefts, and even the exiftence of the Company 
 as an active body. 
 
 It has been fuggefled, that, without the aid of 
 an exclufive commerce, the territorial revenues 
 would yield a furplus fufficient for the participa- 
 tion propofed between Government and the Com- 
 pany : But what would the Company's fhare of 
 that participation be, in comparifon of the ad- 
 vantages they now derive from the revenue ? And 
 fince the State lays claim to the territory, and is 
 itfelf to decide upon the claim, fince the eftablilh- 
 ment of an open trade between India and Great 
 Britain would afford a variety of new channels 
 for the remittance of the tribute accruing to the 
 
 latter
 
 ( 6 ) 
 
 latter country, how long may we fuppofe the 
 Government would think fit to continue to the 
 Company a fliare of that income, in the reception 
 of which its agency ceafes to be thought necef- 
 fary ? Again, it has been alleged, that, with the 
 great capital, the numerous eftablifhments, and 
 the long experience which the Company poflefs, 
 they muft be fuperior in every market to all the 
 private traders who can enter into competition 
 with them : But, befides that their capital would 
 be extremely reduced, if they received merely an 
 annuity from the territorial revenue, the queflion 
 is not, whether the Eaft India Company would be 
 fuperior to their rivals, and might be able, by 
 the weight of capital, to crufh them ; but, 
 whether a trade fo carried on would be beneficial 
 to either party ? We venture to affirm, that it 
 would not i we venture to affirm that, if per- 
 fevered in, it would end in the depreffion, if not 
 the extinction, of all prefent contending interefts, 
 and of the greater part of the home revenue de- 
 rived by the Government from the Eaft India 
 
 trade.
 
 ( 7 ) 
 
 trade. After this, a new order of things might in- 
 deed arife. When the field Ihould be cleared of all 
 the firft powerful competitors, a more quiet fcene 
 might remain for the humbler adventurers who 
 fhould afterwards enter upon it. Trade would 
 indeed be free, but the markets fpoiled. What 
 changes alfo might have taken place in the coun- 
 try it would not be eafy to fay ; but, as the refult 
 of all, we are not afraid of avowing it to be our 
 opinion, that neither would this nation derive fo 
 much profit, nor the ftate fo much commercial 
 revenue, from the India trade as it does at pre- 
 fent. Be this point, however, decided as it may, 
 it is entirely probable that, before a decifion was 
 formed upon it, the Eaft India Company, left 
 with only their corporate capacity, would ceafe to 
 carry on adlive commerce j they would then only 
 have to wind up their affairs, to pay off their 
 debts, and, from fubjects moveable and immo- 
 veable, to fatisfy the proprietors for their (hares of 
 the capital ftock. To what difficulties, difputes, 
 delays, lofles, they would thence be expofed, ic 
 cannot be necefiary to ftate ; the cafe of an indi- 
 vidual merchant, who feels himfelf obliged to 
 
 come
 
 ( 8 ) 
 
 come to a (land, is a familiar, but by no means 
 an adequate illu fixation of what their .condition 
 would be. The proprietors wil! confider what in 
 this cafe the value of their ftock would be, and 
 whether, notwithftanding the adlual property of 
 the Company is held to warrant the prefent mar- 
 ket price of that ftock, if dividends even of eight 
 per cent, ceafed to be paid, and if the capital 
 were only to be realized from the converfion of 
 merchandife and of dead fubjects into money, 
 that ftock could be difpofed of even at par. 
 
 This unhappily is not the propofal of a diftant 
 vifionary cafe. The thing is come near to us. 
 A few weeks ago we had a profpect at once the 
 moft fhining and the moft real, of long and in- 
 creafing profperity $ the hopes of thofe who were 
 the moft fanguine, the wiflhes of thofe who were 
 the moft attached to the Company, were exceeded 
 by it. It was a profpect which feemed to give the 
 nation at large content. But now a dark cloud has 
 covered all 3 we fee not that we fnall have an exclu- 
 five charter at all ; much lefs that we fhall have 
 an increafe of dividend, or a long participation 
 
 of
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 of revenue, or the continuance of commercial 
 profit, or an affurance of any of thofe things 
 which, united, raifed the Company to fo high a 
 point of view, and their flock juftly to fuch pre- 
 eminent value. What is the caufe of all this ? 
 Can we not reftore the flattering profpeft 
 which was fet before us ? How fhall the differ- 
 ences which have arifen be accommodated ? A 
 fair inquiry into thefe points is the fubject of the 
 prefent Trad!:. It is not, we conceive, enough for 
 the India Company to fay, that the national inte- 
 refts are fo deeply concerned in the fyftem which 
 their Directors lay down, as that it is the 
 part of Adminiftration to accede to that fyftem. 
 If this were indeed fo (and certainly, though we 
 cannot fully afifent to that propofition, we are of 
 the number of thofe who think that the interefts 
 both of the State and of the Company will be 
 better confulted in their union, than in their dif- 
 j unction), yet this is not the proper ground for 
 them to reft their caufe upon *, and they go upon 
 
 argu- 
 
 * No doubt there are very cogent arguments of a public 
 
 nature for an accommodation between Government and the 
 
 B Cgra-
 
 ( 1 ) 
 
 arguments extraneous to the conftituent body as a 
 Company. They argue upon the fuppofed ne- 
 cefilties of the other party, rather than upon the 
 intrinfic right of their pretenfions *. 
 
 Neither can we fo far forget the fituation of the 
 Eaft India Company as to regard the negotiation 
 between them and Government, as a negotiation 
 between two independent powers. Both indeed 
 have important interefts depending, but the 
 Company has its exiftence. The one has the 
 power of concefllon ; the part of the other, is, by 
 
 Company; nor have we any reafon to fear that Adminiftration 
 will not fee and refpeft thefe arguments; but the Directors, in 
 taking this ground, feem rather to occupy the place which his 
 Majefty's minifters muft think of right to belong to them. 
 
 * Let it not, however, be underftood, in what is faid here, 
 or elfewhere, that we mean to difparage the ability, the inte- 
 grity and honour which are to be found in the Court of Di- 
 rectors. We know that it poffefles men eminent for. thofe qua- 
 lities; and in treating of public fubje&s with the freedom ne- 
 cefiary for the communication of opinion, we would wifh to 
 ftand remote from the imputation of being influenced by per. 
 fonal illiberality. 
 
 wifdom,
 
 wifdom, argument, temper, deference, concilia- 
 tion, to aim at obtaining all that is really effential 
 to the Company in a new agreement j and if their 
 juft endeavours to this end finally fail, the nation 
 will then fee and judge. In the fad reverfe which 
 has taken place in the afpect of this negotiation, 
 we fearch in vain for adequate caufes. We nei- 
 ther difcover the real differences which fhould 
 hinder the progrefs of negotiation, nor trace the 
 firft occafion of mifunderftanding and alienation. 
 Whatever thefe may have been, it is not our pre- 
 fent intention to aggravate them, but rather, by 
 a review of the negotiation, to appreciate the 
 points in difpute, and to propofe the means of 
 accommodation. 
 
 In order to form a proper idea of the juftice or 
 injuftice of the prefent claims'niade by the Court 
 of Directors, in contradistinction to the rights con- 
 tended for by Adminiftration, in behalf of the far 
 greater general interefh of the empire, it will be 
 neceflary to take a Ihort retrofpect, and alfo to 
 compare the offers held out now by Adminiftra- 
 tion, with the expectations of the reafonable part 
 
 B2
 
 of the proprietors two years ago. We muft like- 
 wife compare the claims advanced by the great 
 manufacturing interefts of Great Britain and Ire- 
 land, with the terms now propofed by Admini- 
 ftration for their relief, and view at the fame 
 time, with a liberal eye, what is due to our fub- 
 jefts in the Eaft. For feveral years after the com- 
 mencement of the preient adminiftration, itfeems 
 to have been annually infifted upon in Parliament 
 by oppofition, when Mr. Dundas, the minifter 
 for India, brought forward his budget, that the 
 Company were involved in debt, which everyday 
 increafed j thus of courfe haftening on their ruin. 
 
 On the other hand, the minifter for India, and 
 his friends, argued that they were in a conva- 
 lefcent ftate, and, under the prefent management, 
 ivould make a rapid progrefs to profperity. The 
 price of their flock, which in peace is the beft 
 criterion of public opinion, rofe from being fo 
 low as 1 18 per cent, in 1784, to 190 per cent, in 
 ,1791, where it feemed to have found its level. 
 
 This
 
 ( -13 ) 
 
 This certainty, when compared with the na- 
 tional funds, proved, that the general expectation 
 did not reach 4 per cent, as a permanent intereft 
 on the money invefled in the Company's (lock. 
 In 1791 Mr. Dundas, after opening the India 
 budget, declared it as his opinion, that our affairs 
 in the Eaft were now in fuch a progreffive flate of 
 profperity as warranted him to fay, " That Bri- 
 tain would fooner benefit by a participation of the 
 Indian revenue, than India would benefit by fup- 
 port from the revenue of Britain ; and that the 
 day was not in his mind far diftant, when the 
 flate might thus participate." This flruck the 
 Houfe with agreeable furprife, but by many it was 
 fuppofed to be impofiible. The great manufac- 
 turing interefts of the kingdom have uniformly 
 exclaimed againft the Company's monopoly. 
 They have complained that fjieir induflry has 
 been cramped by the Company's not extending 
 fufficiently the exports, nor allowing others to do 
 fo. They have preffed the ad mini ft rat ion on a 
 variety of points, according to their refpective in- 
 terefts ; but the great majority or" them feemed to 
 2 agree
 
 ( '4 ) 
 
 agree in this, f< That there fhould be a. free ex- 
 port and import trade, between the merchants of 
 this country on the one parr, and China and In- 
 dia on the other, in fhips of their own, independ- 
 ent of the Company's' control , and that they 
 ihould have leave to fend their own agents to thofe 
 countries, and to employ whom they pleafed." 
 
 :\<iiiry : !j;eq _ '"* 
 
 Some of the great manufacturing towns peti- 
 tioned Adminiftration to extend our exports to In- 
 dia by all poffible means, and to prevent the 
 exports of India from coming here by ail pofil- 
 
 ble means alfo. 
 
 / 
 
 The iliiberality and abfurdity marking fome of 
 thefc petitions certainly was great; but there was 
 alfo fo much good fenfe in others of them, and 
 arguments in favour of the ftate fo unanfwerable, 
 that it thus became a very difficult talk to fup- 
 port the Company in their exclufive trade, and 
 at the fame time to do juflice to fo many con- 
 tending intcrefts. 
 
 Although
 
 ( '5 ) 
 
 Although Adminiftration feemed much attached 
 to the Company, and fupported them in the de- 
 fence they made of themfelves, by (hewing that 
 their exports had been increafed from 400,000!. in 
 1784, to 1,000,000!. in 1792, and were increaf- 
 ing annually, as alfo that the whole of their ma- 
 nagement was much improved j yet they could 
 not entirely exculpate them. The minifters faw, 
 with much regret, that this country had not its na- 
 tural foare of the commerce with India, and an irre- 
 fiftible -proof of this appeared in the growing clandej- 
 tine tr t ade which was carried on by Englifh property 
 under foreign fags. 
 
 This trade feemed to have commenced about 
 the year 1777, and in 1791 it is ftated to have 
 abfolutely occupied 10,255 tons of foreign (hip- 
 ping (as appears in the Memorial in the printed 
 papers, No, 4.), navigated principally by Englifh- 
 men, the returns on which from India clearly ex- 
 ceeded the returns of the Company, fo that the 
 benefit of the larger part of the Indian commerce 
 was loft to the nation, and this of courfe owing 
 
 to
 
 ( 16 ) 
 
 to fome radical defect in the management of the 
 Company. It then became a favourite object 
 with Administration to bring the whole of this 
 commerce to London. 
 
 The proprietors of India (lock faw fo many 
 difficulties ftarted by the mercantile interefts of 
 the kingdom to the exclufive trade, as added to 
 the difpofition which they conceived Parliament 
 ever had to veft the territory in the ftate, that all 
 they looked for was a fecurity for their dividend 
 of eight per cent. 
 
 The minifter for India had never given an opinioa 
 on this confequential point ; but as he had declared 
 in the Houfe of Commons, " That wherever the re- 
 venues went, the debt mufl follow them," the moft 
 prevailing idea was, that the revenue would be 
 taken from the Company. 
 
 Matters flood in this fort of fufpenfe, when Mr. 
 Dundas, early in January, made a communica- 
 tion to the Houfe of Commons, to the following 
 purport : 
 
 That
 
 ( '7 ) 
 
 <c That he conceived the affairs of India were 
 now in fuch a flourifhing Mate, that the nation 
 might participate in the revenue, 
 
 c< That as the Company had run rifks, and 
 contributed fo much to the profperity of our In- 
 dian affairs, he conceived their prefent dividend 
 Jhould not only be fecured to them, but alfo an 
 additional intereft allowed to them on their ftock, 
 
 f< That the prefent revenue fyftem feemed to 
 anfwer very well; and as he preferred the favour- 
 able refult of experience to new theories, that he 
 fhould propofe the territory to continue under the 
 management of the, Company.* 1 
 
 This of courfe Altered the face of matters much, 
 and gave the proprietors new and great expecta- 
 tions. A negotiation was commenced between the 
 jVdminiftrauon and the Court of Directors, which 
 appears in the papers numbered i to 5, printed 
 by the Court of Directors for the ufe of the pro- 
 prietors. It began with Mr. Dundas's letter to 
 C the
 
 the Chairman, of I4th of January laft, indicating 
 his readinefs to have the mod full and candid dif- 
 cufiion with the Court on all points relative to 
 the renewal of their charter. 
 
 On the I7th January, the Court fupplied Mr. 
 Dundas with the paper inferted in No. i. ftyled, 
 " Hints for the Purpofe of forming an Agreement 
 forthe Renewal of the Company's exclufive Trade." 
 
 Mr. Dundas's anfwer to thefe hints appears in 
 the printed paper, No. i. dated the i6th Febru- 
 ary. He there gives his unreferved opinion fo far 
 as he had then made up his mind, but of courfe 
 fubject to fuch alterations as might arife from the 
 different Memorials and intelligence which were 
 naturally to be looked for in the courfe of fuch a 
 negotiation. 
 
 In the commencement of that ftatement he pro- 
 vides for this, byfaying, " As I mean, in theobfer- 
 vations lam now tooffer, to fubmit my general ideas 
 on thefubjeft without concert (it not yetbeing ma- 
 
 tured
 
 ( 19 ) 
 
 Cured forfuch concert) with the reft ofhisMajefty's 
 confidential fervantsj Imuft refervetbeprivilegeofre- 
 confideringany of the joints on which I may have occa- 
 fion to give an opinion , if up on fart her refleSfion IJhall 
 Jeecaujeto alter it inanyrefpetf." Heafterwardsenters 
 at once fo largely into the fubjecl:, and takes fuch 
 comprehensive views, embracing fo many different 
 important interefts, that this letter has been ftyled, 
 and with apparent propriety, the bafis of the whole 
 negotiation. All the real and efiential points in 
 which the proprietors had an intereft, appear in 
 this letter to be conceded to them, and on a fcale 
 liberal beyond any expectations they had framed. 
 After providing for the interefts of their debts, 
 and 500,000!. per annum in liquidation of the 
 principal, Mr. Dundas propofes in their favour as 
 follows : 
 
 Firft, To increafe the capital ftock one mil- 
 lion j and to allow a dividend of ten per cent. ; 
 which was certainly two per cent, more than they 
 expected, and this upon the whole ftock, old and 
 new. 
 
 C a Secondly,
 
 Secondly, That government fliould not par- 
 ticipate until the above was firft paid, and then 
 only to the extent of 500,000!. -per annum j after 
 which the furplus to be appropriated in fuch man* 
 ner as to operate as a guarantee for the capital 
 (lock of the Company. 
 
 Thirdly, The government of India, with the 
 conduct and management of the territorial re- 
 venues, to reft with the Company, as at prefenr. 
 
 Fourthly, Mr. Dundas had previoufly given 
 it as his decided opinion, that the trade with 
 China fhould reft as at prefent, with the Com- 
 pany/ entirely exclufive. 
 
 Fifthly, He alfo agreed to continue to them 
 the trade with India, under an exclufive charter, 
 provided fuch regulations were introduced as 
 would leave the nation no reafon to complain that 
 the exports and imports were cramped. 
 
 In fhort, the only terms that Mr. Dundas 
 feems to require in this letter, in return for fuch 
 
 liberal
 
 liberal concefiions, appear in his own words as 
 follows : 
 
 The fecond head is a confideration of great 
 importance, and upon which there is undoubtedly 
 great difference of opinion, but meaning frankly 
 to throw out the opinion I at prefent entertain, I 
 am free to fay, that, under all circumftances, the 
 advantages of continuing the trade under an ex- 
 clufive charter do, in my judgment, greatly out- 
 weigh the force of any objections which have 
 reached me on the fubject of the Indian mono- 
 poly; and I amfanguine enough in my opinion to 
 believe that, when the fubject is can vailed to the 
 bottom, the merchants and manufacturers of 
 Great Britain and Ireland, who are fuppofed to 
 be the mod interefted in the decifion of this 
 queftion, will concur with me in that opinion. 
 But in delivering this opinion, I defire to be un- 
 derflood as fpeaking of a regulated monopoly, by 
 which exprefiion I mean, that the monopoly muft 
 be fo regulated at to enfure to the merchants and 
 manufacturers the certain and ample means of 
 C' 'Orting to India, to the full extent of the de- 
 mand
 
 mand of that country for the manufactures of 
 this ; and likewife a certainty, that, in fo far as the 
 produce of India affords raw materials for the ma- 
 nufacturers of Great Britain or Ireland, that pro- 
 duce fhall be brought home, at a rate as reafon- 
 able as the circumftances of the two countries 
 will admit of. 
 
 " In dating this obfervation, I am not bring- 
 ing forward any jealoufy that I perfonally enter- 
 tain on the fubject ; for the knowledge I have de- 
 rived of your affairs, by the experience I have 
 had in the government of India, has enabled me 
 to witnefs the great exertions and improvements 
 you have made in the conduct of your commerce, 
 with a view to the very objects in queftion : But 
 the fatt is notorious, that a clandeftine trade, to a 
 conjlderable extent, is certainly carried on between 
 Europe and India, on a capital provided by Britijh 
 fubjefts, both in Britain and India ; and fo long as 
 that trade continues, the public will not be fatif- 
 fied that every thing has been done by the Eaft In- 
 diaCompany that can be done,andofcourfewillnot 
 be fatisfied with the continuance of a monopoly, 
 i unlef*
 
 unlefs they are experimentally convinced, by fomc 
 modeor other, that the twoobjects, both export and 
 import, to which I have referred, are fecured by 
 arrangements fufficiently adequate to the purpofe. 
 
 * c I certainly will not take upon me finally to 
 form an opinion on the fubject, without a full 
 conference with you, and the Committee of the 
 Court of Directors ; but my prefent fentiment is, 
 that the eflential objects to which I have referred, 
 can only be accomplifhed by the Eaft India 
 Company's affording an additional tonnage ade- 
 quate to the exports from Britain and Ireland, and to 
 the imports from India ; and this muft be done at 
 a rate of freight fo reafonable as to fatisfy the 
 merchants and manufacturers of this country, 
 that the effect of the monopoly of the Eaft India 
 Company is not calculated to bring an unnecef- 
 fary, and of courfe an unjuft, burden on the ma- 
 nufa.cturing intereftof Great Britain and Ireland. 
 And I have the lefs difficulty in holding out this 
 idea, becaufe it is obvious that, if the trade of 
 the Eaft India Company is conducted on true 
 
 com-
 
 commercial principles, they can afford to be the 
 carriers both of European and Indian goods 
 - cheaper than any individual merchant or trader 
 can on his own private capital. 
 
 " In this view of the queftion, the propofition 
 feems reafonable on both fides : For, if the ex- 
 porter of Britilh goods, and the importer of In- 
 dian raw materials, can accomplifh both objects 
 at an expence more moderate than he himfelf can 
 afford to do it> he can have no reafon to complain 
 of the Company's monopoly. And on the other 
 hand, if the Eaft India Company do not contri- 
 bute their aid to thofa elTential objects, by fur- 
 niihing freight at a cheaper rate than any indivi- 
 dual can do upon his own bottom j it is a proof 
 that the allegation of the Company's trade not 
 being conducted upon the true principles of com- 
 mercial ceconomy, is better founded than I am 
 at prefcnt difpofed to believe it to be. I am 
 aware that there may be difficulties in the execu- 
 tion of this propofition, even admitting the prin- 
 ciple to be a juft one : But thefe are more pro- 
 perly
 
 perly the fubject of future conference. I am fa- 
 tisfied the difficulties are not infurmountable, and 
 I am fure it is the duty, and it muft be the incli- 
 nation, of the Eaft India Company to fmooth, to 
 the utmoft of their power, every difficulty that 
 may occur in this efiential pare of any future 
 arrangement." 
 
 r 
 
 The purport of Mr. Dundas's letter no fooncr 
 ' went abroad, than the flock rofe from 179 to 195; 
 for all thinking men concluded the whole bufmefs 
 was finifhed, as every reajonable expectation of tbs 
 Company had been anticipated. * 
 
 In the Court's anfwer, however, of the 21 ft of 
 February, it will appear that, although they ac- 
 knowledge the very candid and liberal manner in 
 which Mr. Dundas has given his opinion, they yet 
 are only -ready to receive all that he propofes for 
 their bent-fir, without fhewing an inclination to 
 concede on their part what he conceives to be 
 abfolutely neceffary for the purpofe of transferring 
 the clandeftine trade, from foreign (hips and 
 D foreign
 
 foreign ports, to the Company's fhips and the 
 port of London. 
 
 They, in the firft place, refer to their reports, 
 as laid before the Houfe of Commons in this 
 feflion, on the export trade, to prove that the ad- 
 vantages arifing from continuing the ftrift mono- 
 poly muft be greater than a well-reg'ulated mono- 
 poly. On a reference to thefe reports, it will be 
 found that they fay " they have exported a fuffi- 
 cient quantity of goods to fupply India ,-" on the 
 contrary, we ajfert that they never had.jupplied one 
 Jeventh fart of the goods exported to Indict, and we 
 refer for the illufiration of this afiertion to a do- 
 cument annexed, wherein the exports of the dif- 
 ferent nations of Europe are accurately ftated, 
 and with which we have been favoured from un- 
 queftionable authority. w That the confurription 
 of European goods, owing to the religion and 
 habits of the. natives, could not be materially in- 
 creafed j" on ~the contrary, it is notorious to all the 
 world, that it has been, and continues, in a rapid 
 frogrejfi-ve Jlate of increaje. "JThat the confump- 
 
 tion
 
 tion of woollens, an article which the Company 
 had ever amply fupplied, and which had engrofled 
 their unremitted attention, had fallen off much in 
 India of late years, and was ftill declining." On 
 the contrary, it appears that the confumption of this 
 article had certainly been in a progrejfive ftate ; and 
 although the Company, from being for many 
 years in the habit of neither fending the quantU 
 ties indented for, nor the qualities defcribed, ha4 
 forced great part of the trade into other hands, 
 they ft ill hadjold more in the loft ten years> ending 
 in 1790, than in the ten years ending in 17805 as ap* 
 fears by the Company's records. 
 
 Thefe reports are ably drawn up, if meant to 
 filence thofe unacquainted with the fubjecT. ; but; 
 otherwife, to the informed, there appears fo very 
 limited a knowledge of the export trade to India, 
 particularly of that carried on by foreigners, clan* 
 deftine traders, captains of the Company's fhips, 
 and fo limited a knowledge alfo of the demand in 
 India for European goods, as is really unaccount* 
 able. They moreover feem to have taken much 
 D 2 paing
 
 pains to prove that they had always loft largely by 
 the export trade. 
 
 In fhort, from this latter aflertion, and many 
 Others equally unfounded, no papers could have 
 been produced fo well calculated as thefe reports 
 are, to prove the bad confequences refulting to 
 the Hate from their exclufive monopoly of the 
 Indian trade, tin I efs properly regulated, on the prin- 
 ciples early fuggefted in Mr. Dundas's letter of 
 the i6th February laft. The Committee of Cor- 
 refpondence fcem to fhew in their anfwer, that 
 they have no intention to make conceffions, as 
 appears from their own language in page 14, 
 No. i. of the printed papers, viz. 
 
 " The ideas fuggefted by Mr. Dundas will re- 
 quire a more correct definition and explanation 
 on almoft every point : In their prefent form 
 they go to the full extent of depriving the Com- 
 pany of their exclufive trade ; whilft the Com- 
 pany are expected to provide freight for the mer- 
 chants and manufacturers at a rate cheaper than 
 they can procure it elfewhere.
 
 11 It is fufficient merely to ftate thefe fa&s, in 
 order to fatisfy Mr. Dundas that the Court of 
 Directors never can recommend, and that the Pro- 
 prietors never can accede to, either of theje prcpofi- 
 tions, in the general manner in which they arc 
 ftated in Mr. Dundas's letter." 
 
 They are of courfe/in their firft anfwer, almoft 
 completely at variance with Admin iftration upon 
 the points which the latter require. 
 
 They propofe to fupply eight fhips, for the 
 merchants to fend out exports, at xol. per ton, 
 but with the exception of naval and military 
 ftores. 
 
 It will appear afterwards that they did not flop 
 here, but changed their ground, and objected 
 likewife to copper, then to all metals, to pitch, 
 tar, mafts, &c. &c. 
 
 An appearance of accommodation feems to 
 have been aimed at in an advertifement in the 
 newfpapers relative to thefe eight fhipi. Freight 
 
 was
 
 ( 30 ) 
 
 was offered at lol. per ton, afrer excepting 
 againft the only articles that could be fuppofed 
 worth fending, and at a period well known to be 
 too late to provide goods. 
 
 Now can there be a man, pretending to the 
 lead knowledge of exports, who does not know 
 that thefe articles excepted againft were in reality 
 the only material articles of export, and that 
 no cargo could be made up without them ? Such 
 an offer made to the merchants, what Ihall we 
 fay of it ? That it arifes from ignorance ; or is it 
 infult added to injury? We will affirm neither-, 
 our wifti is to heal. But independently of fuch 
 confiderations, if the merchants had been allowed 
 to export what articles they chofe, no trade could 
 be carried on in exports to India, unlefs as an 
 aid to the imports from thence j for the connec- 
 tion between the two is this : 
 
 On goods from India to Europe, the merchant 
 of India, let it be fuppofed, gains twenty-five 
 f>er cent. So if he lofes ten per cent, in remitting 
 
 his
 
 ( It } 
 
 " ' 
 
 his money back In European exports to India; 
 which, after paying commiflion, intereft, and in- 
 furance, amounting to about fourteen per cent. is no 
 uncommon cafe, he ftiil gains by the general ad- 
 venture, fifteen per cent. The profits on imports, 
 therefore, form the grand inducement for exports 
 to India, and of courfe as the imports from thence 
 are allowed to increafe, the trade in exports from 
 Europe will increafe in a certain relative propor- 
 tion i and without this we can have no reafon to 
 expect a rapid increafe of it. The Committee, ia 
 their anfwer, are fo tenacious of their monopoly, 
 that they refufe even the liberty to bur manufac- 
 turers of importing, raw materials ; but as an ac- 
 commodation, they propofe granting bills from 
 India, on Europe, at 25. the cc. rupee. 
 
 The fad is, that bills to a great amount are 
 now annually wanted en India, and not ficm it. 
 Befides this, owing to the diicount on the Com- 
 pany's bonds abroad, of from eleven to fifteen 
 percent. \ a purchafer of them has had it ia his 
 power for fome years paft, by exchanging them for 
 
 Jong
 
 long bills at the eftablifhed rate of is. itd.^r 
 ct. rupee, to realife here as. id. to 2s. 2d. j of 
 courfe, even if bills were wanted, the exchange of 
 as. would be no inducement. 
 
 It is clear then that this could be no accom- 
 modation to the merchants or manufacturers, nor 
 in the fmalleft degree tend to draw the trade, now 
 illicit, to the port of London. 
 
 The rate of freight, or lol. per ton on exports, 
 which they fay is lower than the rate of Oftend, 
 certainly is higher than the freight there or any 
 where elfe in Europe. The freight eftablifhed 
 by the Dutch, on their regular fhips, is 6K per 
 ton. 
 
 They take it for granted, in this report, <f That 
 the feparate fund or cafti of the Company, about 
 474,094!. which belongs folely to them, will re- 
 main as their property, and form no part of the 
 prefent arrangement." This by no means appears 
 unreafonable, provided they were at allreafonable 
 3 themfelves,
 
 ( 33 ) 
 
 themfelvesj but their attention feems fixed en- 
 tirely on all they term their own rights, without a 
 regard to the rights of others. 1 When they an- 
 fwer relatively to the claim of Government to the 
 territory, they fay c * The Court are neither fur- 
 prifed nor alarmed at the fuggeftion relative to 
 the claim of the public to the territorial revenues, 
 notwithftanding the very refpectable authority 
 of Mr. Dundas } as they are, and always have 
 been, ready to difcufs the Company' sfuperior and 
 undoubted right to thofe territories, which have 
 been acquired by the exertions, and at the ex- 
 pence, of the Company, authorifed for that pur- 
 pofe in a correct and diftinct manner, under the 
 mod folemn charters, and fince maintained 
 through fuccefllve wars, at the hazard of the 
 whole of their capital : But as the propofed ar- 
 rangement, fan&ioned by the opinion of all par- 
 ties, and of the public^ will leave the territory in 
 the hands of the Company, fubjeft, as at prefent, 
 to the control of the board of commiflioners, 
 their rights and privileges will be referved to them 
 entire, and thereby any farther difcuffion on this 
 E fubjecl:
 
 ( 34 ) 
 
 fubjecl becomes unnccefiary. In refpe& to the 
 Com rotation Act, the Court entertained a doubt 
 whether Mr. Dundas has viewed this fubje<5t in fo 
 comprehenfive a manner as he is accuftomed to 
 view all others." Without entering into the me- 
 rits or demerits of the claim, it muft be owned 
 that in this and in other parts of their anfwers, 
 there is a controverfial, tenacious air, which is not 
 calculated to recommend even truth, nor the mod 
 fuitable to the character of petitioners. 
 
 On the 2.5 th February Mr* Dundas brought 
 his budget before the Houfe, in which was a 
 ftatement of the Company's affairs, as drawn out 
 by the Court. The eflimated annual furplus of 
 the revenue they rated at - - .11621,050 
 
 And the amount received in India ^ 
 for fale of imports, and certificates >- 350,000 
 for officers privilege, at - - - ) 
 
 Surplus at the difpofal of the) * 
 
 Governor-general in council ) * >y7 ' 5 
 
 In thefe they certainly did not mean to over- 
 value any thing. Their fentiments of revenue 
 
 would
 
 ( 35 ) 
 
 would be too extenfive a field to enter upon 5 
 but as in t the fale of exports there can be no intri- 
 cacy, we fhall juft touch on the lofs they make to 
 arife on them. The coft of goods and ftores has 
 lately exceeded to India per annum 400,000 
 
 And the amount received for certi-"^ 
 ficates, as by appendix to the budget, t , 
 
 G, on an average of five years, ending f" ^ > 1 ^ 
 in 1790-1, was } 
 
 And as, from the preceding ftatement, they 
 only value the fale of thefe exports and cafh re- 
 ceived for certificates together, at 350,000!. they 
 thus appear to have loft ioo,oool. per annum on 
 their exports of 400,000!. : If this was really fo, 
 how can we account for their wifhing to continue 
 fuch a lofing monopoly? One fact -we certainly 
 have before us that from the commencement of 
 their reports, No. i, 2, and 3, on the export 
 trade, to the end of them, they infift that they 
 have loft largely every year by the exports, 
 and furnifh a variety of ftatements to prove it. 
 This is corroborated by the prefent ftatement 
 E 2 given
 
 ( 36 ) 
 
 given in by Mr. Dundas in his budget, in which 
 they make their lofs joo,oool. on 400,000!. 
 Now if it be true that the Company lofe 25 per 
 cent, upon their exports, whether chargingthem with 
 commuTion and intereft or not, and if private 
 traders lofe, not even, with thofe expences and in- 
 furance accumulated, more than ten $er cent, if fo 
 much j if private adventurers, in fhort, do not lofe 
 twentyrfive per cent, which we pronounce to be 
 impofiible, becaufe with fuch a lofs the clan- 
 deftine trade muft long fince have ceafedj then we 
 may certainly conclude that there has been mif- 
 management in this branch, and that the exclu- 
 five trade, in as far as it has been carried on in 
 exports, has been feverely prejudicial to the in- 
 tereft of the Company. 
 
 Mr. Dundas knowing that, if he erred in taking 
 their ftatement of furplus, it would be erring on 
 the fafe fide, made his appropriation of the amount 
 only according to their ftatement, and after pro* 
 viding for the intereft of their debts, for ten per 
 ent t dividend on their capital (as intended to be 
 
 increafed
 
 ( 37 ) 
 
 Jncreafed to fix millions), and 500,000!. per ann 
 for the liquidation of the principal of their debt; 
 he then propofes the refidye to be given to Go- 
 vernment, to the extent of 500,000!. if fo much 
 remain, and if more, the furplus to be lodged with 
 Government, as a finking fund for the fecurity of 
 the proprietors. The operation of his appropria- 
 tion appears iff letter N of the budget, 
 
 On the fixth of March it appears, in the printed 
 paper, No. 2. that the Court petitioned Parlia- 
 ment for a renewal of their exclufive charter, and 
 on the twelfth, that a Committee of Correfpond- 
 ence had had a conference with Mr. Pitt and 
 Mr. Dundas, of which the committee make a re- 
 port on the i8th to the Court. The great points 
 which the committee mark to have formed the fub- 
 fiance of this conference appear exactly confonant 
 to the tenor of the firft letter of the i6th Febru^ 
 ary, from Mr. Dundas, and are thus noticed bf 
 the committee, in page 9, No. 2. " They (the 
 Minjfters) ^appear to be imprefled with a defire of 
 5 extend-
 
 extending the exports and imports to and from 
 India, including thofe of private trade, by all 
 poffible means. 
 
 " That the exports from Europe fhould be 
 combined in a certain degree, more or lefs, with 
 the import of goods from India. 
 
 " That meafures fhould be adopted to con- 
 vert the clandeftine trade into a fair, regular 
 traffic, through the medium of the Company. 
 
 " And that the charge of feven per cent.. which 
 the proprietors of private trade pay to the Com- 
 pany at prefent, fhould be moderated." 
 
 The next letter we fliall touch on, as being fin- 
 gular, is from the Chairman to Mr. Dundas, dated 
 the 2ift March, being the firft letter in No. 3. 
 He is directed, he fays, to fuggeft, that they 
 < neither think it reafonable nor juft to reduce 
 the charge on private trade below five per cent.'* 
 
 In
 
 ( 39 ) 
 
 In the Court's report of the 21 ft July 
 in which they deeply inveftigate this fubjeft, they 
 make the charges to coft them two per cent. Now 
 Mr.Dundas propofed to allow them three^r cent.; 
 but " they think it would be neither reafonable 
 nor juft to take lefs than five per cent." for what 
 cofts them two per cent. 
 
 The Chairman goes on to fay, ff that the Com- 
 pany had propofed to accept of 22!. freight out 
 and home, to facilitate every reafonable expect- 
 ation, not only becaufe it was lefs than it coft 
 the Company, but alfo becaufe individuals paid 
 more at Oftend j but if a further facrificc was 
 necefifary, the committee would recommend to 
 take 20!. in peace, but not in the proportion of 
 5!. out and 1 5!. home j for, in fuch cafe, individuals, 
 after paying 5!. out on the Company's Ihips, would 
 bring their returns from India in foreign (hips, 
 if a cheaper freight fhould offer, thereby furnilh- 
 ing fubftantial means for extending the clandef- 
 tine trade, which all parties were defirous to fup- 
 prefs." 
 
 Now
 
 ( 40 ) 
 
 Now in a former part, already mentioned, they 
 fay that icl. per ton out is lefs than is paid at 
 Oftend on exports (of the value probably of 50!* 
 or 6ol.)j then from whence draw they a conclu- 
 fion, that thefe fhips would bring goods home, 
 valuing from 500!. to 6ool. per ton, at a lefs 
 freight than 15!. ? Befides, did they not know that 
 there was a difference of one per cent, in the in- 
 furance, equal of courfeto 5!. or 61. per ton, after 
 allowing for which, they muft know that icl. on 
 a foreign fhip cod a merchant equal to 15!. upon 
 a Company's 
 
 When we weigh this with the thorough invef* 
 tigationmade in the Court's report of 21 ft of July 
 1791, and in a former report equally well drawn 
 up on freight of privileged goods, where they 
 determine <c that the freight paid by the Com- 
 pany on all their piece goods amounted to 51 L 
 per ton, it is not eafy to fugged why they fhould 
 apprehend that foreign fhips would bring fimilar 
 goods under 15!. per ton. 
 
 On the 22d, Mr. Dundas enclofed to the Chair- 
 man fuggeftions on the fubject of the clandeftine 
 
 trade,
 
 ( 4' ) 
 
 trade, in which a claufe was inferted, propofing 
 to remove certain reftriclions in the act of 1781, 
 which did not anfwer the defign of prevention, 
 but became the occafion of immoral deviations 
 and of difregard to the laws. 
 
 To refcrve to the Company the exclufive right 
 of exporting marine flores (which was among the 
 fuggeftions), as mafts, fpars, cordage, anchors, 
 pitch, tar, and alfo the right of exporting copper, 
 was going a great way indeed to indulge them ; 
 for this gave them the exclufive fupply of that 
 which they never had yet fupplied India with, and 
 moft probably never would. Of two thoufand tons 
 per annum of the article of marine (lores alone con- 
 fumed by the country (hips in India, the Company, 
 on invefligation in 1791, had never fupplied two 
 hundred tons: Indeed, fo far from it, that their 
 own marine was in a great degree fupplied by 
 clandeftine traders. 
 
 We then come to a Memoril whiclr, on the 
 
 25th of March, the Chairman ufhered into the 
 
 Committee of correfpondence from gentlemen, 
 
 who, he faid, fubfcribed themfelves, " A Com,. 
 
 F
 
 ( 42 ) 
 
 mittee appointed by feveral mercantile houfes, 
 acting as agents for the Eaft-Indies." The official 
 letter which accompanies it from the committee, 
 confiding of three of the moft refpectable houfes in 
 London, -viz. Meffrs.Muilman and Co. Boehm and 
 Co.andRaikesandCo. does not appear, nor indeed, 
 was it brought forward afterwards in the general 
 court. Why this fort of myfteryihould beobferved 
 with an official letter, which ought to be as public 
 as the day, is unaccountable. The firft remark the 
 committee make is, <{ that the Memoralifts avow 
 themfefaes to have fet the laws of this country at 
 defiance, and to have been agents in carrying 
 on an illicit trade} although, in the feventh pa- 
 ragraph of their reafons in fupport of their Me- 
 morial, they very pathetically reprobate a difre- 
 gard to the laws of this country, as a practice 
 that has a degrading effect upon thofe who em- 
 bark in it." 
 
 Now, very unfortunately for the Committee 
 of Correfpondence, this Memorial is afterwards 
 printed by order of the Court of Directors, and 
 there is not ons word in it tending to Juch an avewal. 
 
 In the anfwer of the Committee of Correfpond- 
 ence,
 
 ( 43 ) 
 
 dence, they appear in like manner to mifappre- 
 hend the Memorial ifts meaning almoft through- 
 out, nor do they feem, in any one part of it, to 
 invalidate a Tingle argument advanced. 
 
 The Memorial in fad has much the fame tend* 
 ency as the other petitions, which appear from 
 different public bodies, for giving more facility 
 to the commerce between Britain and India, and 
 only differs in the following points: As large 
 proprietors, the Memorialifts are attached to the 
 Company's real intereft, which intereft, from 
 the fubftance of the Memorial, they feem to have 
 ftudied with fuccefs : In confequence of this, it 
 appears to be their wifh that the Company flbould 
 remain in poffefiion of every exclufive privilege 
 which can be ufeful to them, and not detrimental 
 to the ftate. 
 
 Their principal aim avowedly is, and really 
 
 appears to be, " to annihilate completely the 
 
 clandefline trade, and bring an equal trade in a 
 
 legal way into the Thames;" and they certainly 
 
 F 2 do
 
 ( 44 ) 
 
 do point out the moft effectual means for thefe 
 ends* 
 
 An impartial reader, of that Memorial, and of 
 the Court's anfwer to it, who was a complete 
 judge of the fubject, would moft probably view 
 the Memorialifts as the greateft enemies the clan- 
 deftine trade could have, and the Court of Direct- 
 ors the fteady, though perhaps unintentional, 
 fuppoi ters of it. 
 
 The Memorialifts have the advantage of cool 
 difpaflionate reafoning alfoj whereas the Court, 
 from their firft fetting off, feem to be very in- 
 temperate, as if they were attacked in their juft 
 rights by a fet of fmugglers. 
 
 As the writers have given a fort of explanation 
 of their Memorial, in confequence of the Court's 
 mifapprehenfion, we need fay no more on the fub- 
 jecl:, as it will, no doubt, be publiflied by the 
 Court, and fo fpeak for itfelf. 
 
 There
 
 ( 45 ) 
 
 There are certain principles in commerce 
 which are fo well known, and which repeatedly 
 appear in thcfe papers, that it would be fuperflu- 
 ous to mention them here, were it not that the 
 Ccurt has entirely overlooked them, and has ob- 
 jected fo ftrongly to giving the great mercantile 
 interefl of Britain the freedom required for it, 
 which has appeared to be the only object that 
 Adminiftration could not give up. 
 
 One of thefe principles is, cc That, provided 
 the fame quantity of India goods muft be im- 
 ported annually into Europe (and this the Com- 
 pany cannot prevent), the greater the quantity 
 and the greater the variety which can be brought 
 to any one port, the fales not only of thefe In- 
 dia goods at fuch port muft be proportionally 
 higher than at any other port, but the de- 
 mand alfo of all other goods muft likewife in- 
 creafe; for the increafed number of purchafers, 
 which fuch a variety of India goods muft bring, 
 cannot confine their purchafes to any one fort of 
 goods." 
 
 Another
 
 Another pofition is, (t That no mercantile ba- 
 dy trading on their own capital, and paying in- 
 tereft and infurance, can rival a fimihr body 
 trading npon a capital on which they neither have 
 to pay intereft nor infurance, provided the ma- 
 nagement is equally good." 
 
 We would apply this fairly to the ftate and 
 circumftances of the Company, without (train- 
 ing it beyond its proper import. We admit 
 that private traders may enhance the prices of 
 India commodities at the original markets ; but 
 they cannot poflefs themfelves of the Company's 
 aurung eftabliihmens, nor of a gratuitous ca- 
 pital. If they injure the Company, they muft 
 injure themfelves more ; they cannot main- 
 tain a competition againft themj the territorial 
 revenues muft weigh down all oppofition, and 
 the fources of thefe are fed afrefh by every en- 
 hancement of the prices of thofe commodities 
 which the territories furnifh. We do not wifh 
 that any difturbance fhould be given to the Com- 
 pany's purchafes abroad; means, we think, may 
 be taken to obviate that confequence; but it is 
 
 eafy
 
 ( 47 ) 
 
 eafy to fee that, in the affair of competition, the 
 Company are not only incomparably the ftronger 
 party for carrying it on, but the party that will 
 gain as Jovereigns, by their own lofs and the lofs 
 of others as merchants. No alarming apprehen- 
 fion, therefore, cught to be entertained from this 
 quarter. 
 
 Having ftated the fubftance of what pafTed in 
 negotiation refpecting the clandestine trade, and 
 entered into fome difcufiion of the merits of that 
 queftion, we are next led to the claim advanced 
 by the Britifh manufacturers, " that the wear of 
 Indian muflins and callicoes fhould be prohibited 
 in this country j" and this fubject, though in 
 our humble opinion important, lies in a fmall 
 compafs. The Court of Directors, in their minute 
 of the 2 5th of March, had actually conceded this 
 point to the manufacturers: The minifter, however, 
 apparently aware of its confequence to different 
 interefts, was not fo ready to yield it, had ex- 
 prefly left it open in his letter of the 26th of 
 March; and the general Court of Proprietors 
 which met on the 28th, alarmed at the afpect it 
 2 had
 
 ( 48 ) 
 
 had on their affairs, refifted it with far more ear- 
 neftnefs than they have fhewn in the queftion of 
 the clandestine trade. How does Mr. Dundas 
 then (land at prefcnt with refpect to it ? In the 
 very letter which conveyed the propofed prohi- 
 bition, he fays, " I am aware that matter will, at 
 the inftance of thofe immediately intercfted, un- 
 dergo a farther confiderationj and as 1 am per- 
 feBly perfuaded, on the moft mature confederation J 
 can give to tbefubjeff, that thofe who urge the requeft 
 are afting in too narrow a 'view of it, I think it 
 highly probable that part of the quejrion may admit 
 a revifion, with the acquiefcence ^of the gentlemen 
 who haveprejfed it upon Us" Is any thing more 
 wanting to explain the ftate of this affair ? Are 
 many words necefiary to Ihew that in fad: there 
 is no conteft here, that the Miniiler is with the 
 Court of Proprietors, and that, having already de<- 
 clared themfelves upon it, they will in the iflue 
 receive due fatisfaftion concerning it ? Let us 
 beware therefore of aggravating our differences 
 into a mafs, by throwing among them things 
 lhat in fad conflitute no part of them, Qf 
 
 this
 
 ( 49 ) 
 
 this defcription is the prefent fubjefl, and the 
 proprietors have reafon to congratulate them- 
 felves, that it is not in reality a matter of feri- 
 ous contention. 
 
 There are three other points relative to trade in 
 difpute between the Court r and Mr. Dundas. 
 Thefe are, firft, Whether the freight of privileged 
 goods fent by individuals on the Company's (hips, 
 agreed to be in all iol. per ton, (hall be charged 
 in the proportion of 5!. on tLe outward bound 
 goods, and 15!. on the homeward bound, as he 
 thinks would be beftj or in the proportion of 81. 
 outward, and 12!. homeward, as they require? Se- 
 condly, Whether the Company's charges on thofe 
 goods (hall be three per cent, as he propofes, or 
 five percent, which the Chairman contended for? 
 And, laftly, Whether, among the merchandize fo 
 privileged by the Company with tonnage in their 
 fhips, piece goods fnm India (hall be included? 
 
 Now, it may be very well to pay a juft at- 
 tention even to minute things ; but (hall fuch 
 G trivial
 
 trivial points as thefe be the occafion of ferious 
 difagreement, and fruftrate or obftrudt a negoti- 
 ation, which involves the fate of the firft com- 
 mercial body in the world, and moft materially 
 the welfare of this nation and of all Indoftan ? It 
 is aftcniftiing that any colour fhould be afforded 
 for making this a queftion. In reality the Di- 
 rectors appear to be arguing againft the intereft 
 . of the Company, fince the probability of a con- 
 tinued large importation from India to England 
 is far greater than the probability of a continued 
 large exportation to India. But what, if it fhould 
 prove otherwife? and the Company (hould 
 have 3!. per ton lefs than they require on outward 
 bound goods, counterbalanced by 3!. more than 
 they require on the homeward bound ? What if 
 (contrary to probability) fbmething fhould be 
 loft by this arrangement, would it not be better 
 to fubmit to the lofs, than to put off the fettle- 
 ment of the charter and the parliamentary con- 
 firmation of our expected ten per cent, another 
 year, and perhaps for ever ? Is it for fuch points 
 as thefe that we are to quarrel with an Ad- 
 
 miniftration
 
 ( 5' ) 
 
 miniftration which laid fo liberal a bafis of ne- 
 gotiation ? As to the charges on privileged 
 goods, it need only be faid, that the Court, in 
 contending for 5 per cent, are confefiedly con- 
 tending for a profit j and the defign of the mi- 
 , nifter is, by holding forth all practicable induce- 
 ments to the Britiih refidents in India, to deftroy 
 the clandeftine trade, and bring their confign- 
 ments to this country. 
 
 With refpect to the third article, the exclufion 
 of piece goods from the merchandize which in- 
 dividuals (hall be permitted to fend home, it may 
 fuffice to fay, that this is a new requijition on the 
 part of the Directors. For the feven laft years, 
 this permifiion has been constantly accorded when 
 the Company had any freight to fpare j and if the 
 great Indian ftaplc of piece goods is to be excluded 
 from the private imports into Britain j what is this y 
 in otherwords } butfiill uph-lding the clandejline trade? 
 If that article is not allowed to come to England, 
 it will go, as it has too much done for a number 
 of years pad, to all the ports of the continent j 
 G a and
 
 C 5> ) 
 
 and the other meafures now brought forward for 
 abolifhing illicit traffic will be fruftrated. It mud 
 be once more repeated, that the confumption 
 and demand of Europe for India commodities will 
 not be leflened by any reftraints we lay on our im- 
 portations, and it is moft of all needful, when we 
 propofe to encourage an increafed exportation 
 from this country, that we fhould enlarge the 
 means of return in proportion, To increafe our 
 exports by means of individuals, and, at the fame 
 time, narrow the former channel of private im- 
 portation 'from India, what is it but an effectual 
 contrivance to throw more than ever of the va- 
 luable trade in piece goods into foreign and ir- 
 regular channels ? The Directors fay, that " if the 
 piece good trade 1 is opened, it will be impoffible 
 to guefs how far fpeculation may go, in extend- 
 ing it to very ruinous lengths," fo as (according 
 to their fubfequent expreflion) to Cf render it im- 
 pofTible for ihe Company to liquidate their po- 
 litical debts, ftill lefs to furnifh the propofed par- 
 ticipation to the public." But is not the piece
 
 ( 53 ) 
 
 good trade now open ? Has it not been open 
 thefe feven years ? If any thing new were pro- 
 pofed, a fear of fpeculation might indeed be 
 pleaded j but this is an old bufinefs, a thing al- 
 ready praclifedj and has it hurt the Company's 
 fales ? Do they find a progreflive decreafe, or a 
 progrefilve increafe, in the profits of their piece 
 goods for fome years paft ? Befides, will private 
 Speculations, that are unprofitable, long continue? 
 And if they prove advantageous, will not the 
 Company alfo gain ? And what, after the utmoft 
 efforts that can be ufed, are the whole of the 
 profits on the Company's piece goods, that any 
 pofiible variation in that article fhould materially 
 affect the refources of the Company, or the 
 participation founded upon it; which, after all, 
 is to fail firft, with refpeft to the Jhare of govern- 
 weut only t if it fails at all? We earneftly depre- 
 cate, therefore, this new meafure ofreftrifition, well 
 intended, we fhall readily admit, but very unhap- 
 pily conceived for the interefts which all parties 
 wi(h to promote. 
 
 One
 
 ( 54 ) 
 
 One more point remains to be noticed, which 
 turns rather upon the conftrudion of what has al- 
 ready paffcd, than upon an original difference in 
 principle. It was underftood that, out of the 
 i ,200,000!. calculated to be the annual furplus of 
 the Company's affairs, an incrcafe in the dividend 
 of two per cent., making in all ten per cent., fnould 
 be allowed to the proprietors j 500,000!. more 
 paid in liquidation of debt, and 500,000!. more, 
 or any furplus that remained, not exceeding that 
 fum, to Government. 
 
 The refolution propofed by Mr. Dundas touch- 
 ing this article, bears, that, if the profits of the 
 Company in any one year {hall not fuffice for the 
 payment of 500,000!. to Government, the defi- 
 ciency fhall be made good from the furplus that 
 may remain in any orher year, after providing for 
 the payment of dividend and of debt as above 
 mentioned. The Court obferve hereupon, "that 
 to make good this fum at all events, and create 
 any deficiency as a debt, may be ruinous to the 
 Company, and goes beyond any fair expectation 
 
 of
 
 ( 55 ) 
 
 of the public, which ought not to exceed the 
 Company's annual ability." 
 
 Now, the Adminiftration and the Company 
 both agree, that if, after the other fpecified prq- 
 vifions, the Compan) 's furplus can afford 500,000!. 
 annually to the public, the public (hall have it. 
 Then if the Company, after furnifhing the other 
 allotted payments, have in one year a furplus of 
 only 300,000!., and, in the next, a furplus of 
 700,000!., is it to be underftood that, in thefe 
 two years, Government fhall receive only 8oo,oool. 
 although, in fact, the Company have a furplus of 
 i ,000,000!. ? Would this fairly and fubftantially 
 fulfil the fenfe of the firft agreement between Ad- 
 miniftration and the Directors ? And in what 
 manner are we to underftand that the claim of Ad- 
 miniftration turns deficiency into a debt? Is it a debt 
 upon the general property of the Company, or a 
 debt only upon a certain contingent furplus ? The 
 lafl merely, and the debt is no otherwife claimable 
 than on the condition that the Company do actu- 
 ally realife fuch a furplus. 
 
 We
 
 ( 56 ) 
 
 We fee, therefore, no poffibility of this claim's 
 
 becoming <e ruinous to the Company," fmce it is 
 
 founded folely upon a computation of profit j and 
 
 the failure of this computation is a difcharge to 
 
 the Company *. 
 
 After reviewing, then, every point of any im- 
 portance, which has been the occafion of difpu- 
 tation between Adminiflration and the Court of 
 Direflors, we fee none refolvable into a fettled 
 
 Indeed, when it is well confidered that any participation 
 by Government is wholly fufpended on a contingent fund, 
 whence alfo other large allotments are firil to be fatisfied, it 
 muft be allowed that this gives the nation an additional claim 
 to the entire fum ftipulated for it, if that fund can make ft 
 good. 
 
 .The liberality of Adminiftration alfo appears in the dif- 
 pofal of the furplus remaining after the appropriations already 
 mentioned, and after the Company's debts are reduced to 
 3,000,000!. in India, and the bond debt at home to 1 ,500,000!. 
 viz. one fixth of the furplus they propofe to go in increafe to 
 the dividend on the Company's (lock, and the other five-fixths, 
 though to go to Government, are yet to reft with them as a 
 collateral fecurity for the C ompany "sjlock and their dividends. 
 
 difference
 
 ( 57 ) 
 
 difference of opinion, except thofe which relate 
 to the private and clandeftine trades ; and even 
 with refpecl: to thcfe, only the articles which arc 
 trifling, fuch as the allotment of the agreed rate of 
 freight, and the difference of two per cent, in the 
 charges, remain matters of contefl ; for, with 
 regard to the more important queftions of bring- 
 ing the trade, now clandeftine, to the pert of 
 London, all parties declare for it : And, with re- 
 gard to the only other queftion remaining upon 
 this fubjec~t, whether Britifli refidents in India 
 ihall be permitted to receive commifiions from 
 foreigners, the Committee ofCorrefpondence have 
 given an opinion upon it, which, in our humble 
 conception, may ferve as the bafis of regulation 
 reflecting this matter : c< The Committee are 
 perfuaded, under the circumftances they have 
 ftated, that any permifiion to be extended to fo- 
 reigners, or their trade, will be confined to India : 
 That no perfon fhall be permitted to aft as an 
 agent to foreigners, or others, who is not under 
 covenants to the Company, and under the entire 
 control and authority of the governments in 
 H India:
 
 ( 58 ) 
 
 India: That no Britifh agent fhall be fuffered to 
 lend, on advance, money for the benefit of fo- 
 reigners in trade; nor to trade themfelves to any 
 place whatfoever on this fide the Cape of Good 
 Hope, except to Great Britain : And, finally, 
 that fuch agents ihall not be permitted to inter- 
 fere at the Aurungs in the purchafe of piece- 
 goods." 
 
 It appears extremely proper that the Company's 
 power of llcenfing and controlling all Britiih fub- 
 jeds in their territorial poflefiions fhould be con- 
 tinued j and that all exiftingafts and regulations, 
 legiflalhe or local, touching the refidence of fuch 
 fubjeds, and the mode of conducting manufac- 
 turing and aurung bufinefs in the country, Ihould 
 remain in force. 
 
 Here likewife, therefore, there is, in fad, no- 
 thing efTential to adjuft; and it appears aftonifh- 
 ing that a matter of fuch little real importance as 
 rhe propofed alteration in the act of 21 George III. 
 relpecYmg iiuercourfe with foreigners, fliould have 
 i become
 
 ( 59 ) 
 
 become the oftenfible caufe of alienation between 
 his Majefty's Minifters and the representatives of 
 the Company. That act had its origin on the laft 
 renewal of the charter in 1781. It was apparently 
 intended to prevent the afiiftance of Brittfh fub- 
 jects from extending, in any poflible way, to the 
 trade of European foreigners in India or Europe. 
 It is univerfally notorious that the act has not 
 anfwered its end. Some, indeed, have refpected 
 the authority, though they faw the impolicy, of 
 of the law. The fervants of the Company, more 
 efpecially thofe diftinguifhed by their character or 
 truft, have moreover been actuated by a fenfe of 
 honourin refpect to themfelves and to their employ-' 
 ers. But they were the very perfons in whom a 
 power of dealing with foreigners could moft faftly 
 have been veiled, becaufe fuperior ties of intereft, 
 reputation, and attachment, would (till have main- 
 tained in their minds a due regard to thofe inte- 
 refts of the Company, to prevent the apprehended 
 facrifice of which, the reftrictions in queftion were 
 framed. Others, either not under [he fame cove- 
 nants, or not entirely under the fame influences, 
 have always been found to act as the agents of fo- 
 H 2 reigners,
 
 ( 60 ) 
 
 reigners, and the clandefline trade has greatly in- 
 creafed fince the act was pafied. Foreigners find 
 no difficulties; the aft is daily trampled upon, 
 and the confcioufnefs of tranfgreffing, in one 
 inftance, the example exhibited to the world, 
 of tranfgreffing with impunity, tends to dif- 
 fufe a fpirit of irregularity and licenfe unfa- 
 vourable to morals and to fociety. Now 
 
 what can be more natural and proper than to 
 advert to this ftate of things upon the formation 
 of a new charter? Would it have been right to 
 have pafl~ed over without regard an inveterate dif- 
 order, growing with time ftill more inveterate? 
 If the law is good, and if it can be rendered effec- 
 tive, let it by all means be enforced. The policy 
 of the law has been ftrongly denied by perfons 
 who ought to be competent judges; but all agree 
 that, after an experience of twelve years, it proves 
 ineffective, nor does any one expect that it will 
 hereafter be better enforced than it has been. 
 Shall it then be continued merely to be flighted, 
 when all hope of its anfwering its profefTed de- 
 fign is gone, and when it only ferves to injure 
 men's minds ? No anfwer to this capital objec- 
 tion
 
 ( 6i ) 
 
 tion has been attempted on the part of the Court 
 of Directors. But if this objection be indeed 
 founded, what are they contending for in their 
 violent refiftance to the repeal of this law ? Are 
 they combating againft a new evil, which only the 
 abrogation of this law will introduce; or are they 
 ftickling about the dead letter of a ftatute, con- 
 fcious that the reality of the evil already exifts, 
 and that this ftatute is efficacious to no end but 
 thofe detrimental confequences already dated ? 
 If this be fo, ought it not to be done away, and 
 other means ufed to accompli fh its defign ? Thefe 
 means are indeed already agreed upon in the fcheme 
 of bringing the trade, now clandeftine, to the port 
 of London : Surely, therefore, the point here in 
 queftion is not a caufe for which the Company 
 would chufe to hazard, or to poftpone the re- 
 newal of their charter, with all the benefits fuf- 
 pended upon it. And as in fad there appears to be 
 no folid obftacle to the profecution of the nego- 
 tiation, let us hope that it will go on without 
 further delay, and foon be happily terminated. 
 
 A P P E N-
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 EXPORTS from EUROPE to INDIA. 
 
 HPHE Exports of Europe to India are annually about 
 3 7,454 tons, and may be clafled under the following 
 heads : 
 
 Firft : Foreign Companies, viz. 
 
 Dutch, French, Danifli, Portuguefe, regular 
 
 {hips, S;. -':. . ; '-. - 18,048 tons 
 
 Second : Clandeftine Trade. 
 Englifh commerce carried on under foreign 
 
 flags, - - 10,255 
 
 Third: Private Trade. 
 
 In Englifii Company's (hips, carried by com- 
 manders and officers licenfed and un- 
 licenfed, on an average of ten years to 
 1790* - 4^258 
 
 Fourth : Englifb Company's. 
 
 On an average of the laft fix years, ending in 
 1790; during which period their exports 
 have been increafed beyond that of any 
 former period : 
 
 Goods for fale, 2748 
 
 Stores, - - 2145 
 
 - 4,893 
 Annual European Exports to India, 37>454 tons. 
 
 THE END.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 Form L9-32m-8,'58(5876s4)444 
 
 OHIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
 
 A view of 
 contested points 
 in the Nogotiatiol 
 
 itween Adminis- 
 tration and the 
 ctors of the East 
 
 DS 
 
 ^63 
 
 A2P2 
 
 1793 
 
 v.5