[Footnote 199-4: The older political economists have, as a rule, ignored this law, and were wont to consider every payment of money to a foreign country as injurious. Thus, for instance, _Culpeper_, Tract against the high Rate of Usury, 1623, 1640, disapproves all loans made from foreign countries, because they draw more money in interest, and in repayment of the principal out of the nation, than they brought into it at first; and all the more, as the loan is generally procured, not in the precious metals, but in foreign goods, of which there is a superabundance in the home country. Similarly _Child_, Discourse of Trade, 1690, 79, who claims that the creditor was always fattened at the expense of the debtor. Hence _v. Schröder_, Fürst, Schatz- und Rentkammar, 141, advises that the capital borrowed in foreign countries should be confiscated. Compare, also, _v. Justi_, Staatswirthschaft, II, 461. And yet the very simplest calculation shows, that if a man borrows $1,000 at 5 per cent. and makes 10, he is doing a good business with the borrowed capital. This _Locke_, Considerations, 9, recognizes very clearly. Compare, also, _J. B. Say_, Traité, II, ch. 10, and _Hermann_, Staatsw. Unters., 365 seq.] [Footnote 199-5: Think of the English creditors in Portugal and the Genoese in Corsica (_Steuart_, Principles, II, ch. 29.) Considered simply from an economic standpoint, the Edinburg Review, XX, 358, very clearly demonstrates that England should recruit her army from Ireland, where wages are so much lower than in Great Britain. But how dangerous in a political sense! In 1832, one-fourth of the stock of the United States Bank was in the hands of foreigners, and hence its opponents nick-named it the "British Bank." By the rules of the principal bank in Philadelphia, in 1836, only American citizens were allowed a vote in its proceedings. Similarly in the case of the Bank of France. (_M. Chevalier_, Lettres sur l'Amerique du N. I, 364.) It may be remarked in general, that the older political economists have based correct political views on false economic principles, while the more modern ignore them entirely.] [Footnote 199-6: Compare _Montesquieu_, E. des Lois L, XXII, 17; _Blackstone_, Commentaries, I, 320.] [Footnote 199-7: Thus Austria conceded, in 1854-55, a number of railways to French capitalists, and always favored the purchase of landed estates by small foreign princes. In the latter case, Austrian influence abroad was much more promoted by the measure than was foreign influence in Austria.] [Footnote 199-8: Every nationality is not worth the sacrificing of the highest economic advantage or profit to it. Or, would it be preferable to leave the Hottentots and Caffirs, poor, barbarous and heathenish?]