The Industrial History of EnglandGibbins, Henry de Beltgens
History
The Industrial History of England
Gibbins, Henry de Beltgens
Great Britain -- Economic conditions; Industries -- Great Britain -- History
§ 2. THE MISTAKE OF THE MERCANTILE THEORY--But unfortunately our
capitalists made a great mistake in their policy. The commercial mind
of England was dominated by what is known as the “Mercantile Theory.”
It was a theory that had grown up naturally out of the spirit of
Nationalism, of self-sustained and complete national life, that was
our heritage from the Renaissance and the Reformation. It was not
altogether wrong, for its object was national greatness, an object
laudable and harmless enough. But the believers in the policy of
increasing our national greatness also believed that it could only be
attained in one way, and that was at the expense of our neighbours.
In one form and another the theory frequently crops up even to-day,
though we are supposed to have repudiated it. The measures adopted
to attain this end were various and not always unsuccessful. True,
{169} our commercial forefathers made the mistake--not uncommon even
now--of believing that national wealth consisted chiefly in holding
large stores of gold and silver, and hence they prohibited the export
of bullion, till the East India Company demonstrated the futility of
this scheme.[48] They endeavoured, too, to obtain a supply of the
precious metals by prohibiting the purchase of foreign manufactures,
and encouraging only the imports of raw material, that we might sell
our own manufactures for foreign silver and gold. Hence proceeded wars
of tariff, as for instance when we prohibited the import of gold-lace
from Flanders, and the Flemish in revenge excluded our exports of wool.
But the most famous of the restrictions imposed by this theory were
the Navigation Acts of 1651, by which it was ordered that no goods
from Asia, Africa, or America were to be imported into England or her
colonies, except in ships belonging to English subjects, and no goods
of any European country were to be imported except in English vessels,
or ships belonging to the country from which the goods came. Of course
these Acts resulted in collision with Dutch interests, for the Dutch
were at that time the ocean carriers of the world. We were driven out
of neutral ports, and lost the Russian and Baltic trade, because of the
high charges of English ship-owners, to whom this protective scheme
gave a monopoly of freights. But at the same time our shipping trade
gained a great stimulus, and our commercial supremacy grew with it.
Of course, however, this protective measure made the country at large
pay a higher price for this privilege than was necessary, and we could
probably have done better without it. Nevertheless these Acts, coupled
with the development of our Indian and American trade, resulted in
giving us a position of undoubted {170} commercial supremacy. Many
other Protective measures, of a worse kind than this, were passed owing
to the dictates of this theory, as for instance when in 1750 Parliament
forbade the importation of pig and bar iron from our American colonies.
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