To study the interests of Great Britain and of British merchants with regard to the trade with India; to combine those with the territorial possessions and the interests of the country at large; to investigate also not only what would be the immediate consequences of a sudden change, but what might be the ultimate effects, are all necessary, to form that sort of judgment proper for the basis of action. That those immediately concerned with the affairs of India have examined the subject with great care and to good purpose, is abundantly evident from the correspondence, speeches, and pamphlets, already before the public; fraught as they are with many important facts, much acute observation, and for the most part dictated by a desire to come, if possible, to the best conclusion, all this is evident, yet it strikes me that something useful remains behind. Were the question simply between _Government_ and _the Company_, I should not descant upon it; aware as I am that it has been canvassed by the parties on every ground and in every shape; but there is a _third_ party who has interfered. The _merchants at large_ all over the kingdom, the _shippers_ at _the out-ports_, and the manufacturers in the interior, all urged on by what is termed the _public voice_, crying out _A Free Trade_ and _No Monopoly_. The trading towns, cities, and manufacturers do not pretend to have considered the subject minutely; therefore, for aught they know to the contrary, they are acting honestly and right; I will therefore address them with that open frankness which such conduct deserves, and which may lead to a conclusion very different from what was aimed at in the last Session of Parliament. For the sake of perspicuity I shall consider the subject under different heads. I. All monopolies are not wrong or injurious, as in some cases, we are the best and cheapest served by a monopoly; this proved, it follows that the India Company being possessed of a monopoly, does not of itself argue that it should be withdrawn. II. That the trade with India is far from being carried on, on the principle of monopoly. III. That any great change must be attended with great danger, consequently we must not follow theory too readily, but pay great respect to practice and experience. IV. That the public at large have no reason to complain of the India Company, as the articles brought by it have not increased in price in proportion either to rums or sugars from the West Indies, where there is no monopoly. V. That the merchants of Liverpool, Hull, &c. and the manufacturers in their endeavours to share the trade with London, are seeking what would be injurious to them. VI. That some errors were fallen into in the present Charter, which may be advantageously corrected in the next, and a few slight amendments may be attempted with safety, but no great change or innovation.