This theory was developed into a system by Mun, who affirmed that the best method to “increase our wealth and treasure is by Forraign Trade, wherein wee must ever observe this rule; to sell more to strangers yearly than wee consume of theirs in value.”[719] The effects of this doctrine were vastly increased and modified by the current belief that the precious metals constituted the real wealth of a kingdom, and that its whole trade, therefore, should be considered mainly in reference to the resultant balance with foreigners in gold and silver. For example, Mun states that if pepper be worth twenty pence in Amsterdam, and threepence in the East Indies, it is a gain to the nation to buy it in the latter, even though the freight and other charges make it cost more in England than if it were imported from Holland, because those charges are paid by Englishmen to Englishmen, so that only threepence in actual coin leaves the country, as compared with twenty. In this particular, he points out, his countrymen “must ever distinguish between the gain of the kingdom, and the profit of the Merchant.”[720] Footnote 719: Thomas Mun, _England's Treasure by Forraign Trade_, 1664 (ed. New York, 1910), p. 7. _Cf._ J. R. McCulloch, _A Short Collection of Early English Tracts on Commerce_ (London, 1856), p. vi. Footnote 720: Mun, _England's Treasure_, p. 14. In his defense of the East India Company, he advanced upon his predecessors in advocating the export of bullion, if, as a direct result, a larger amount could be shown to be imported. _Cf._ chaps. V and VI of his _Considerations on the East India Trade_ (London, 1701); reprinted in _Early English Tracts_, pp. 1-49.