and under a perfuafion of the foundnefs of their maxims, our Author argues that they never ought to be tried: delenda eft Carthago; but has he foreknowledge or confidence fufficient to point out Carthage? When he argues upon the fuppofition, that under this treaty it is agreed, that henceforth France fhall be at liberty to export British manufactures upon the fame terms with Britain herfelf;' and that America will be fupplied through this medium, rather than by a direct intercourse: it is imagined we need not enter farther into his commercial reafoning against the measure. In brief, France is to become the general carrier of British manufactures; our arable land is to be converted to pafture for the raising of wool; our ploughmen. and failors are to dwindle into manufacturers; our navigation-act, according to the fashionable parliamentary phrase, is done away; and the greatness of Britain is no more! Art. 16. An Appeal to the Landed Intereft of Great Britain, on the Operation of the Commercial Treaty with France. By a Country Gentleman. 8vo. Is. 6d. Debrett. Under the character affumed by the prefent Writer, he declares, that however liberal the principle may be, that fuggests an union of interefts between manufacturers and land-owners, it is an uncontro vertible fact that nature has fet an infuperable bound to fuch a connection. For while commerce can flourish but by throwing the taxes on the landed intereft, it is impofing too fevere a task on human frailty to expect that he will willingly fubmit to a fair participation of the public burdens.' It paffes current indeed in common difcourfe, that all taxes fall ultimately on land. But we do not understand how the landlord, or raifer of a raw material, is injured by a duty paid after it has affumed a new form under the creative hand of the artifan. Manufacture is neceffary to make it marketable, and provided the tax is not fo heavy as to defeat its purpofe by reducing confumption, it is ultimately defrayed by the confumer, with a profit to the dealer for the advance. Our Author complains, that befide what land-owners contribute jointly with their fellow fubjects [as confumers], they labour under oppreffions specifically their own, arifing nearly to the enormous amount of half the national revenue.' If then we accept his own calculation, and with him confider the body of the people as compofed of two claffes, land-owners and manufacturers, it appears that, at leaft, the latter fubmit to a fair participation of the public burden:' and farther, that they raise it by the mere force of perfonal industry, and not as the indolent claimants of incomes growing from hereditary property. When our Author afferts that the first principle of commerce is monopoly; it may be hinted, that there are not wanting philofophical politicians, who contend that the monopoly most injurious to the interests of the community, is that of land. Leaving fuch points however to be adjusted between the country gentleman and the manufacturer, the tendency of this appeal is to fhew, that the commercial treaty will be the destruction of the British corn diftillery; and that the Hovering-act is defeated by a general invitation to the French cutters, luggers, and all thofe p. REV. March 1787. * Pamphlet, P. 13. other other veffels, which if English, would be immediately confifcated, to come and exercise their trade on the English coaft, without a fear of moleftation.' For his own eafe, the Author adopts several statements made by other opponents to this measure, to fhew that it will operate materially to injure the revenue. He adds, It has been urged, that this deficiency will be made good by the increase of cuftoms on French goods; but let it be recollected, that this increase of cuftoms on French goods can only be obtained by a proportionable decrease of excifes on our own.' It fhould alfo be recollected, that unless we are fupplied with French goods on the terms fuggested by another writer on the fame fide of the question*, we must give English goods in exchange for them; and money accruing from an extended foreign trade, will on all hands be allowed to be at least as acceptable as if raised by excifes on internal confumption. On the whole, the writer deems the permanent interefts of proprietors of land facrificed to immediate commercial views, by this new-fangled treaty, this ill-begotten, undigested mass of absurdity and contradictions.' Art. 17. Sentiments on the Interefts of Great Britain. With Thoughts on the Politics of France, and on the Acceffion of the Elector of Hanover to the German League. 8vo. 25. Robfon, &c. In pointing out what he deems the true interefts of Britain, this Writer is, by his own account, only amufing himself in vain efforts to twift a rope of fand: for to what end do we oppofe the aggrandifement of the house of Bourbon, if all the fceptres in Europe are inevitably doomed to fall into their hands? Under fuch a fatality, there is nothing left for us but defpair. Such indeed, he declares, must ultimately be the confequence of their pretended falique law. This is a truth as clear and demonftrable as any propofition in Euclid. For in the first place, this law effectually prevents any foreign prince becoming intitled to their crown, though they never fail of availing themselves of the laws of other nations refpecting defcents; confequently their alliances with foreign powers muft, one time or other (however diftant it may be), make the house of Bourbon heirs to all the crowns in Europe. We have ftrong proofs of this in their having already acquired the kingdoms of Spain and Naples, the duchies of Parma and Burgundy, &c. &c. There are but three different modes by which this growing political evil can be put a stop to; the first is (by a joint confederacy of all the powers in Europe) to oblige them to repeal the falic law; the fecond to establish it in all their kingdoms; and the third, for all the other royal houfes in Europe to refufe forming any matrimonial alliances with that of Bourbon. The laft would evidently be the leaft effectual, in confequence of the number of alliances already formed.' But where once a general confederacy of all the other powers in Europe is formed on this grand occafion, they will have no reason to top at the haft effectual measure to relieve themselves; while more • See Rev. Jan. p. 170, last par. effe Qual effectual operations may be fuggefted than are propofed in the above recipe. In this fad fituation, the only confolation in our view is, to be the laft fwallowed up; and this indeed may be hoped from the little prefent danger of our fceptre lapfing to France for want of a British hand to hold it. All meafures of policy under fuch an impending fate, can be only for temporary benefit; and we are told, that nature has been no lefs officious in implanting a kind of enmity in the mental organization of the inhabitants (i. e. of England and France) than in adapting their territories to be in a state of warfare with each other.' We find alfo, that nature has been as officious in working up a mental antipathy in the Spaniards to their neighbours the French; for- as to any extenfion of territory in that quarter, the difcordant difpofitions of the people of the two countries feem to be an unfurmountable obftacle to it.' As therefore like caufes are uniform in their effects, we have the comfort of perceiving as unfurmountable an obftacle to the French dominion stretching over the British Channel, as over the Pyrences. No danger then can arife from merely trading with the French; for not to infift on there being very little friendship in trade, a commercial intercourse cannot furely unravel mental organization! If our Author diflikes the natural inferences from his own principles, he might freely have enjoyed current notions as he found them, without endeavouring to form a fyftem on them. The Emperor of Germany is the power with whom he recommends an alliance to balance the influence of the house of Bourbon. But if France is fo powerful by fea, if her commerce is fo extenfive, and her manufactures in fo improving a state as is reprefented on this occafion, will our refufal to trade with them check the progrefs of their exifting advantages, and deprefs her to our wishes in all points? If they will not, what are we to do? If, at the fame time, France offers us her native produce in exchange for our manufactures; and whether we confent to the exchange or not, a very intimate clandeftine intercourfe of this nature is nevertheless carried on between the two countries; what are the dictates of common fenfe on fuch a view of the fubject? This Author declares, that the prefent treaty (unless owing merely to want of intellect and information) bears the ftrongest marks of having been advised more for the purpose of fecuring a few venal voices in parliament, and the applaufe of the interested and inconfiderate, than for the real good of this country." Such random affertions are easily thrown out upon any occafion whatever, have no particular meaning, and require no answer. But the French are fortifying Cherburg, which would be unneceflary if they intended perpetual peace: and what do we intend by ftrengthening Portsmouth and Plymouth? No farther anfwer is neceffary. Our Author highly disapproves the acceffion of the Elector of Hanover to the German league; but without entering into the merits of this tranfaction, we cannot avoid remarking the pofition he advances as the teft of its propriety. The fame monarch is equally the fovereign of Hanoverians and Britons; they are both his people; and as the latter greatly exceed the former in number, and their ter ritory is proportionally more extenfive, it follows, that though the S 2 King King should even facrifice the immediate interefts of Hanover, yet if it is beneficial to Britain, he would still be pursuing the conduct of a philanthropist and father of his people, because acting for the general benefit of his fubjects.' If this be wholefome doctrine, it will apply equally to Scotland or Ireland. Will the Author follow it up in either cafe, and undertake to convince the fufferers? Art. 18. A Letter from a Manchefter Manufacturer to the Right Hon. Charles James Fox, on his Oppofition to the Commercial Treaty with France. 8vo. 6d. Stockdale. Merely a loofe general approbation of the treaty, and an expoftu lation with Mr. Fox for deferting the manufacturers, whofe cause he efpoufed during the agitation of the Irish treaty, yet now employs himself in unfeasonably reviving national jealoufies, and industriously circulating publications in oppofition to their interests. Art. 19. An Answer to the complete Investigation of Mr. Eden's Treaty. 8vo. IS. Stockdale. This is a brief, but fo far as can be judged from comparison, a full anfwer to the pamphlet referred to, including alfo fome ftrictures on the "View of the Commercial Treaty +." The Author fhews, by a contraft of our commercial circumftances at the refpective times, that arguments drawn from the ftate of our trade above a century ago, must be in a great measure inapplicable to our prefent fituation; and that the calculations formed to fupport fuch arguments, are grofsly mif-ftated. The Author of the latter of thefe two pamphlets having mentioned the attempts of Charles II. and his weak brother, to open a trade with France; it is replied that trade had been open from the earliest periods, and was fo by fpecific treaties during the reigns. of James I. and Charles I. and under the government of Cromwell. And yet it was at this very time, during the continuance of thefe commercial treaties, that the English trade acquired its firft fpring and vigour, and that the general wealth of the country gained a greater proportional increase, than perhaps it did in the fame number of years at any other period of our history.' It is added, that there is little doubt but that under all thofe circumstances, the balance was against us; but I am equally perfuaded on the other hand, that the amount of that balance in the Report of the Commiffioners, was enormoufly over-rated.' He gives a table of the duties to which our woollens were fubjected by the treaty of Utrecht, to fhew how unfairly that treaty has been compared with the one now concluded; a cording to which it appears, that they were then liable to impofitions varying from above 23 to 55 per cent.; and also states the objections made to the Utrecht treaty by the party writers of that time, to fee how they apply to the prefent treaty; and the preference due to a free and unrefrained intercourfe, which is now opened. The article of low wages has been fo often difcuffed, that little opportunity remains of throwing any new light on the tubject: it is now, however, illuftrated by well obferving, that if the rate of wages did indeed regulate the comparative cheapness of manufactures, this kingdom, inftead of her immenfe export to all quarters of *See Rev. Feb. p. 162. + Idem, p. 169. the the globe, would be underfold in every market by the pooreft nations in Europe, and her fuperiority would be overthrown by the leaft formidable of her rivals.' He concludes with a vindication of the manufacturers, who in their oppofition to what are called the Irish propofitions, were fuppofed to have attached themselves to a party; but who are now miftakenly charged with deferting their former principles and declarations. Art. 20. A fhort Vindication of the French Treaty, from the Charges brought against it in a late Pamphlet, intitled, A View of the Treaty of Commerce with France, figned at Verfailles, Sept. 28, 1786, by Mr. Eden *. 8vo. 1s. 6d. Stockdale. The pamphlet here animadverted on, bore no fuch formidable appearance, as to lead us to expect, in answer to it, a fpecial defence of the treaty. Having, however, attained that distinction, the task was proportionably eafy, and the Short Vindicator encounters it fuccefffully, with the ufual and obvious replies to fuch arguments as were maintained by the author of the View, &c. Art. 21. The Speech of the Right Honourable William Pitt, in the Houfe of Commons, February 12, 1787, in a Committee of the whole Houfe, to confider of fo much of his Majesty's most gracious Speech to both Houfes of Parliament, as relates to the Treaty of Navigation and Commerce between his Majefly and the Most Chriftian King. 8vo. 1s. 6d. Faulder. The general points confidered in this very able and fatisfactory fpeech, have been already circulated in every periodical vehicle of intelligence. Those who wish to fee it at large, will find all the popular objections brought against the treaty, in the feveral pamphlets published on the occafion, here ftated, and briefly yet fully anfwered: fo that this fpeech may be affirmed to comprehend a com.. plete view of this great national undertaking. Art. 22. Preface to Poor Richard's Almanac for the Year 1787. Printed at Philadelphia, and fold as ufual at the appointed Places in the different United States: London reprinted, from a Copy just received from America; and fold by Debrett. 8vo. 6d. Not printed at Philadelphia, we may venture to pronounce. - The piece is manifeftly of home manufacture; and is intended as an attack on the commercial treaty; by which, according to the Author of this anti-minifterial fquib, France will, in the first inftance, acquire, and America in a fecondary way, regain, what in all trade is very neceffary, a trading capital;' and this at the expence of Great Britain, in confequence of the long, credits which fhe will be drawn in to give, to the greater extent † the better.' Hence, fays this pretended American, a trading fund may be created in France and America too, which will enable both countries to rear their heads in foreign commerce, in proportion as old England, their common rival, must be depreffed- The Author enlarges, fhrewdly *See Rev. Feb. p. 169. He thinks it may amount to 192 millions for France alone, in the twelve years during which the treaty is to laft. S 3 enough |