THE HIBERNIAN MAGAZINE, O R, Compendium of Entertaining Knowledge, For FEBRUARY, 1774. The great Queftion refolved, Whether a rich Country can ftand a Competition with a poor Country (of equal natural Advantages) in raifing of Provifions, and Cheapness of Manufactures? With fuitable Inferences and Deductions. The following Solution to this interefting Question is extracted from a small Treatife, juft publifbed, intitled Four Tracts, together with two Sermons, on Political and Commercial Subjects;' written by Dr. Tucker, Dean of Gloucefter, a Gentleman well known in the Republic of Letters, and univerfally admired for his ftrong and nervous Reasoning. We have endeavoured to retain the Subftance of his ingenious Solution; but the Limits to which we are confined have obliged us to omit feveral curious Particulars mentioned by this mafterly Writer. I T has been a notion univerfally received, that trade and manufactures, if left at full liberty, will al ways defcend from a richer to a poorer ftate; fomewhat in the fame manner as a stream of water falls from higher to lower grounds; or as a current of air rushes from a heavier to a lighter part of the atmosphere, in order to restore the equilibrium. It is likewife inferred, very confiitently with this firft principle, that, when the poor country, in procefs of time, and by this influx of trade and manufactures, is become relatively richer, the course of traffic February, 1774. will turn again: So that, by attending to this change, you may difcover the comparative riches or poverty of each particular place or country. The reafons ufually affigned for this migration, or rather circulation of industry and commerce, are the following, viz. In rich countries, where money is plenty, a greater quantity thereof is given for all the articles of food, raiment, and dwelling: Whereas in poor countries, where money is fcarce, a leffer quantity of it is made to ferve in procuring the like neceffaries of life, and in paying the wages of the fhepherd, the plowman, the artificer, and manufacturer. The inferrence from all I 2 which which is, that provifions are raised, and goods manufactured much cheaper in poor countries than in rich ones; and therefore every poor country, if a near neighbour to a rich one, and if there is an eafy and commodious. communication between them, muft unavoidably get the trade from it,were trade to be left at liberty to take its natural courfe. Nor will this increase of agriculture and manufactures, whereby the richer country is drained, and the poorer proportionably enriched, be ftopped or prevented, till things are brought to a perfect level, or the tide of wealth begins to turn the other way. Now, according to this train of reafoning, one alarming and obvious confequence muft neceffarily follow, viz. That the provifions and manufactures of a rich country could never find a vent in poor ones, on account of the higher value, or dearer price fet upon them: Whereas thofe of a poor country would always find a vent in a rich one, becaufe they would be afforded the cheapest at the common market. This being the cafe, can it be denied, that every poor country is the natural and unavoidable enemy of a rich one; efpecially if it fhould happen to be adjoining to it? And are not we fure beforehand, that it will never cease of draining it of its trade and commerce, industry and manufactures, till it has at leaft fo far reduced it, as to be on a level and equality with itself? Therefore the rich country, if it regards its own intereft, is obliged by a kind of selfdefence to make war upon the poor one, and to endeavour to extirpate all its inhabitants, in order to maintain itself in ftatu quo, or to prevent the fatal confequences of loofing its prefent influence, trade, and riches. For little lefs than a total extirpation can be fufficient to guard againft the evils to be feared from this dagerous rival, while it is fuffered to exift. But is this indeed the cafe? - One would not willingly run counter to the fettled notions of mankind; and yet one ought not to make a facrifice of truth to mere numbers, and the authority of opinion, especially if it fhould appear, that these are truths of great moment to the welfare of fociety. Therefore, with a becoming deference, may it not here be asked, ― Can you fuppofe, that Divine Providence has really constituted the order of things in fuch a fort, as to make the rule of national felf-prefervation to be inconfiftent with the fundamental principle of univerfal benevolence, and the doing as we would be done by? For my part, I muft confefs, I never could conceive that an all-wife, juft, and benevo lent Being would contrive one part of his plan to be fo contradictory to the other, as here fuppofed; that is, would lay us under one obligation as to morals, and another as to trade; or, in fhort, make that to be our duty, which is not, upon the whole, and generally speaking (even without the confideration of a future ftate) our interest likewife. Therefore I conclude à priori, that there must be some flaw or other in the preceding arguments, plausible as they feem, and great as they are upon the foot of human authority. For though the appearance of things at first fight makes for this conclufion, viz. That poor countries must inevitably draw away the trade from rich ones, and confequently impoverifh them, the fact itself cannot be fo. But, leaving all arguments of this fort, as being perhaps too metaphyfical for common ufe, let us have recourfe to others, wherein we may be affifted by daily experience and obfervation. Suppose therefore England and Scotland to be two contiguous, independent kingdoms, equal in fize, fituation, and all natural advantages; fuppofe, likewife, that the numbers of of people in both were nearly equal; but that England had acquired twenty millions of current fpecie, and Scotland had only a tenth part of that fum, viz. two millions; The queftion now is, Whether England will be able to fupport itfelf in its fuperior influence, wealth, and credit? Or be continually on the decline in trade and manufactures, till it is funk into a parity with Scotland; fo that the current fpecie of both nations will be brought to be juft the same, viz. eleven millions each. Now, to refolve this question in a fatisfactory manner, a previous inquiry fhould be fet on foot, viz. How came England to acquire this great furplus of wealth? And by what means was it accumulated? If in the way of idleness, it certainly cannot retain it long; and England will again become poor;-perhaps fo poor as to be little better than Hungary or Poland: But if, by a courfe of regular and univerfal induftry, the fame means, which obtained the wealth at firft, will, if purfued, certainly preferve it, and even add thereto So that England need not entertain any jealoufy against the improvements and manufactures of Scotland; and, on the other hand, Scotland, without hurting England, will likewise increase in trade and be benefitted both by its example, and its riches. But, as these are only general af fertions, let us now endeavour to fupport them by an induction. Now, on the fide of the poorer tion, it is alledged that, feeing it has much less money, and yet is equal in fize, fituation, and other natural advantages, equal alfo in num bers of people, and thofe equally willing to be diligent and induftri-, ous; it cannot be but that fuch a country must have a manifeft advantage over the rich one in point of its parfimonious way of living, low wages, and confequently cheap manufactures. On the contrary, the rich country hath the following advantages, which will more than counter-balance any disadvantage that may arife from the foregoing articles, viz. ift. As the richer country hath acquired its fuperior wealth by a general application, and long habits of industry, it is therefore in actual poffeffion of an established trade and credit, large correfpondences, experienced agents and factors, commodious fhops, work-houfes, magazines, &c. also a great variety of the best tools and implements in the various kinds of manufactures and engines for abridging labour; — add to thefe good roads, canais, and other artificial communications; quays, docks, wharfs, and piers; numbers of fhips, good pilots, and trained failors: And, in refpect to husbandry and agriculture, it is likewife in poffefiion of good inclofures, drains, waterings, artificial graffes, great flocks, and confequently the greater plenty of nanures; alfo a great variety of plows, harrows, &c. fuited to the different foils; and, in fhort, of every other fuperior method of husbandry arifing from long experience, various and expenfive trials. Whereas the poor country has, for the most part, all these things to feek after and procure. 2dly. The richer country is not only in poffeffion of the things already made and fettled, but also of fuperior fkill and knowledge (acquired by long habit and experience) for inventing and making of more. The importance of this will appear the greater, when we confider, that no man can pretend to fet bounds to the progrefs that may yet be made both in agriculture and manufactures; for who can take upon him to affirm, that our children cannot as far exceed us as we have exceeded our Gothic forefathers? And is it not much more natural and reasonable to fuppofe that we are rather at the beginning beginning only, and just got within the threshold, than that we are arrived at the ne plus ultra of useful discoveries? Now, if fo, the poorer country, however willing to learn, cannot be fuppofed to be capable of making the fame progrefs in learning with the rich, for want of equal means of instruction, equally good models and examples; and therefore, though both may be improving every day, yet, the practical knowledge of the poorer in agriculture and manufactures will always be found to keep at a respectful distance behind that of the richer country. - 3dly. The richer country is not only more knowing, but is alfo more able than the other to make further improvements, by laying out large fums of money in the profecution of the intended plan. Whereas the poor country has here the mortification to find that the want of thefe is in many cafes an infuperable bar to its rife and advancement: And this circumftance deferves the more regard, as it is a known fact and trite obfervation, that very few great and extensive projects were ever brought to bear at first fetting out; and that a vast deal of money must be funk, and many years be elapfed, before they are capable of making any re turn. 4thly. The higher wages of the rich country, and the greater fcope and encouragement given for the exertion of genius, industry, and anbition, will naturally determine a a great many men of spirit and enterprife to forfake their own poor country, and fettle in the richer ; fo that the one will always drain the other of the flower of its inhabitants: Whereas there are not the me temptations for the beft hands and artists of the rich country to forfale the best pay, and fettle in a poor one. 5thly. In the richer country, where the demands are great and conftant, every manufacture that requires various proceffes, and is compofed of different parts, is accordingly divided and fubdivided into feparate and diftin&t branches; whereby each perfon becomes more expert, and alfo more expeditious, in the particular part affigned him. Whereas, in a poor country, the fame perfon is obliged by neceffity, and for the fake of getting a bare fubfiftence, to undertake fuch different branches as prevent him from excelling, or being expeditious in any. In fuch a cafe, is it not much cheaper to give 2s. 6d. a day, in the rich country, to the nimble and adroit artift, than it is to give only 6d. in the poor one, to the tedious, aukward bungler? 6thly. As the richer country has the greater number of rival tradefmen, and those more quick and dextrous, the goods of fuch a country have not only the advantages arifing from quickness and dexterity, but alfo will be afforded much cheaper, on account of the emulation of fo many rivals and competitors. Whereas, in a poor country, it is very easy for one rich, over-grown tradefman to monopolife the whole trade to himfelf, and confequently to fet his own price upon the goods, as he knows that there are none who dare contend with him in point of fortune; —or, what is full as bad, the like confequences will follow where the numbers of the wealthy are fo few, that they can combine together, whenever they will, to prey upon the public. 7thly and laftly. In the richer country, the fuperiority of the capital, and the low intereft of money, will enfure the vending of all goods on the cheapest terms; becaufe a man of 2000l. capital.can certainly afford to give the best wages to the beft workmen, and yet be able to fell the produce or manufacture of fuch workinen at a much cheaper |