A History of England, Period III. Constitutional MonarchyBright, J. Franck (James Franck)
History
A History of England, Period III. Constitutional Monarchy
Bright, J. Franck (James Franck)
Great Britain -- History
into the English prisons in 1728. The only power not English now in
North America was that of Spain, which had received a portion of
Louisiana from the French in exchange for Florida, which they had been
obliged to cede to the English. French influence had disappeared after
the Peace of Paris.
[Sidenote: Constitution of the provinces.]
There was an infinite variety of religion, law and government in these
provinces, but in all a certain assimilation to the English
Constitution; a house of assembly, an upper house or council, sometimes
elected, sometimes nominated by the governor, and the governor himself
in the Crown colonies nominated by the King and the proprietors in
conjunction. The population appears to have been about two and a half
millions.
[Sidenote: Restrictions on colonial trade.]
[Sidenote: General suppression of smuggling.]
The old view of the use of colonies was that they should be employed
entirely for the advantage of the mother country. It was held that, by
the mere fact of their existence, and for the protection they received,
they were bound by a debt of gratitude. They were thus the constant
subject of mercantile legislation in favour of the mother country, and
by the existing navigation laws very close restrictions were laid upon
their trade. By those laws the colonies were prohibited from procuring a
large number of articles--those, namely, which formed the chief
manufactures of England--anywhere except from the mother country. They
thus became naturally one of our principal purchasers. Although their
imports into England were considerable, the balance of trade was
constantly against them--that is, taken as a whole, they constantly owed
large sums of money to England. This balance had, of course, from time
to time to be made up by payments in actual money, which was chiefly
procured by the colonies by means of illicit trade, carried on partly
with the West India Islands, but chiefly with the Spanish colonies of
America, and was illicit chiefly in that it broke the customhouse
regulations of Spain. The colonial illicit or free trade, as it was
called, was regarded in point of morality as something quite different
from European smuggling. It was carried on openly and systematically by
the best colonial merchants, and enabled the colonies to get rid of
their timber and those wooden products known under the name of lumber,
and also of a considerable quantity of their farm produce which would
otherwise have been wasted. A wise minister would not have thought of
meddling with such a business, which was in fact the only means by which
the colonists were enabled to carry on conveniently their trade with
England. But Grenville, with his narrow and legal turn of mind, could
see no difference between colonial smuggling and smuggling in England.
This he was determined to put down, and not content with the ordinary
means of repression, English men-of-war were employed in all directions
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account