Free Trade with India: An Enquiry into the True State of the Question at Issue Between His Majesty's Ministers, the Honorable the East India Company, and the Public at Large, on the Justice and Policy of a Free Trade to India — John Shaqi
Free Trade with India: An Enquiry into the True State of the Question at Issue Between His Majesty's Ministers, the Honorable the East India Company, and the Public at Large, on the Justice and Policy of a Free Trade to IndiaCommon sense (Writer), active 1813
History
Free Trade with India: An Enquiry into the True State of the Question at Issue Between His Majesty's Ministers, the Honorable the East India Company, and the Public at Large, on the Justice and Policy of a Free Trade to India
Common sense (Writer), active 1813
East India Company; Great Britain -- Commerce -- India; India -- Commerce -- Great Britain
* * * * *
I. _All monopolies are not wrong or injurious, as in some cases, we
are the best and cheapest served by a monopoly, this once proved, it
follows that the India Company being possessed of a monopoly, does
not of itself argue that it should be withdrawn._
The manner in which the public can be the best and cheapest supplied
with an article, is in itself the _best_, whether it be by a monopoly
or not. This is conceded even by Adam Smith, that great enemy to
monopolies; and he adduces in proof _the Post Office_, which is _one of
the strictest and most complete monopolies in existence_, yet the
business is done remarkably cheap and well, and with a degree of
security not otherwise attainable. It is infinitely more correct than
the carriage of small parcels, which is by open competition, and all
circumstances considered much cheaper.
The Bank of England is partly a monopoly, but by no means a complete
one, and it is better regulated and does business better than private
banks that issue notes, and which are so far its rivals.
Most of the concerns which have been brought to maturity in this country
have first flourished as _monopolies_ under the name of patents, and
indeed there are many reasons for highly praising those temporary
monopolies.[C]
The insurance companies are not exactly monopolies, neither are they
free traders in the true acceptation of the term, jointly or separately
taking insurances without legislative interference; and, without such
companies, it would be impracticable to carry on insurance so well as it
is done.
Navigations and water-works companies are monopolies in _principle_, but
they are necessary and advantageous.
From all these examples it follows, that _monopoly_ is not bad _merely_
as _monopoly_, and that its being _injurious_ depends on particular
circumstances, and therefore the India Company being a company of
monopolists, would not be a sufficient reason for its abolition, even
were it proved to be so, but this has not yet been done.
II. _That the Trade with India is far from being carried on, upon
the principle of monopoly._
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account