Endnotes 1,001–1,500
“Any corn growing in the fields, or any other corn or grain, butter, cheese, fish or other dead victuals whatsoever.” But grain was exempted when below certain prices, e.g., wheat, 6s. 8d. the quarter. ↩︎
This and the preceding sentence are misleading. The effect of the provisions quoted in the preceding paragraph would have been to “annihilate altogether” the trade of the corn merchant if they had been left unqualified. To avoid this consequence 5 and 6 Ed. VI, c. 14, § 7, provides that badgers, laders, kidders or carriers may be licensed to buy corn with the intent to sell it again in certain circumstances. So that the licensing of kidders was a considerable alleviation, not, as the text suggests, an aggravation. ↩︎
5 Eliz., c. 12, § 4. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the consumer or his immediate factors.” It should be noticed that under 5 and 6 Edward VI, c. 14, § 7, the kidder might sell in “open fair or market” as well as to consumers privately. ↩︎
Diligent search has hitherto failed to discover these statutes. ↩︎
§ 4 incorrectly quoted. The words are “not forestalling nor selling the same in the same market within three months.” Under 5 and 6 Ed. VI, c. 14, a person buying and selling again “in any fair or market holden or kept in the same place or in any other fair or market within four miles” was a regrator, while a forestaller was one who bought or contracted to buy things on their way to market, or made any motion for enhancing the price of such things or preventing them going to market. ↩︎
12 Geo. III, c. 71, repeals 5 and 6 Ed. VI, c. 14, but does not mention 15 Car. II, c. 7, which is purely permissive. If 15 Car. II, c. 7, remained of any force in this respect it must have been merely in consequence of the common law being unfavourable to forestalling. ↩︎
Eds. 1 and 2 read “attends.” ↩︎
Charles Smith, Three Tracts on the Corn Trade and Corn Laws, 2nd ed., 1766, p. 145. The figures have been already quoted above, here. ↩︎
“The export is bare one thirty-second part of the consumption, one thirty-third part of the growth exclusive of seed, one thirty-sixth part of the growth including the seed.” —Three Tracts on the Corn Trade and Corn Laws, p. 144; quoted above, here. ↩︎
This was not the first law of its kind. 3 Ed. IV, c. 2, was enacted because “the labourers and occupiers of husbandry within this realm of England be daily grievously endamaged by bringing of corn out of other lands and parts into this realm of England when corn of the growing of this realm is at a low price,” and forbids importation of wheat when not over 6s. 8d., rye when not over 4s. and barley when not over 3s. the quarter. This Act was repealed by 21 Jac. I, c. 28, and 15 Car. II, c. 7, imposed a duty of 5s. 4d. on imported wheat, 4s. on rye, 2s. 8d. on barley, 2s. on buckwheat, 1s. 4d. on oats and 4s. on peas and beans, when the prices at the port of importation did not exceed for wheat, 48s.; barley and buckwheat, 28s.; oats, 13s. 4d.; rye, peas and beans, 32s. per quarter. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “restrained by duties proportionably.” ↩︎
Before the 13th of the present king, the following were the duties payable upon the importation of the different sorts of grain:
Grain Duties Duties Duties Beans to 28s. per qr. 19s. 10d. after till 40s. 16s. 8d. then 12d. Barley to 28s. 19s. 10d. 32s. 16s. 12d. Malt is prohibited by the annual Malt-tax Bill. Oats to 16s. 5s. 10d. after 9½d. Peas to 40s. 16s. 0d. after 9¾d. Rye to 36s. 19s. 10d. till 40s. 16s. 8d. then 12d. Wheat to 44s. 21s. 9d. till 53s. 4d. 17s. then 8s. till 41. and after that about 1s. 4d. Buck wheat to 32s. per qr. to pay 16s. These different duties were imposed, partly by the 22nd of Charles II in place of the Old Subsidy, partly by the New Subsidy, by the One-third and Two-thirds Subsidy, and by the Subsidy 1747. —Smith
The table of duties in this note is an exact copy of that in Charles Smith, Three Tracts on the Corn Trade 2nd ed., 1766, p. 83. That author professes to have taken the figures from “Mr. Saxby, in his Book of Rates” (i.e., Henry Saxby, The British Customs, Containing an Historical and Practical Account of Each Branch of That Revenue, 1757, pp. 111–114), but besides rounding off Saxby’s fractions of a penny in an inaccurate and inconsistent manner, he has miscopied the second duty on barley, the first on peas and the third on wheat. The “Old Subsidy” consisted of the 5 percent or 1s. poundage imposed by 12 Car. II, c. 4, on the values attributed to the various goods by the “Book of Rates” annexed to the Act. According to this, imported beans, barley and malt were to be rated at 26s. 8d. the quarter when the actual price at the place of importation did not exceed 28s. When the actual price was higher than that they were to be rated at 5s. the quarter. Oats and peas were to be rated at 4s. the quarter. Rye when not over 36s. was to be rated at 26s. 8d., and when over that price at 5s. Wheat when not over 44s. was to be rated at 40s., and when over that price at 6s. 8d.
So under the Old Subsidy:—
Beans, barley and malt at prices up to 28s. were to pay 1s. 4d., and when above that price 3d.
Oats and peas to pay 2·4d.
Rye up to 36s. to pay 1s. 4d., and when above, 3d.
Wheat up to 44s. to pay 2s., and when above, 4d.
The Act 22 Car. II, c. 13, took off these duties and substituted the following scheme:—
Beans to 40s. to pay 16s., and above that price, 3d.
Barley and malt to 32s. to pay 16s., and above, 3d.
Oats to 16s. to pay 5s. 4d., and above, 2·4d.
Peas and rye the same as beans.
Wheat to 53s. 4d. to pay 16s., then to 80s. to pay 8s., and above that price, 4d.
Buckwheat to 32s. to pay 16s.
But 9 and 10 Will. III, c. 23, imposed a “New Subsidy” exactly equal to the Old, so that duties equal to those of 12 Car. II, c. 4, were superimposed on those of 22 Car. II, c. 13. By 2 and 3 Ann., c. 9, an additional third, and by 3 and 4 Ann., c. 5, an additional two-thirds of the Old Subsidy were imposed, and by 21 Geo. II, c. 2, another amount equal to the Old Subsidy (“the impost 1747”) was further imposed. So between 1747 and 1773 the duties were those of 22 Car. II, c. 13, plus three times those of 12 Car. II, c. 4. This gives the following scheme:—
Beans to 28s. pay 20s. and after till 40s. pay 16s. 9d. then 1s.
Barley to 28s. pays 20s. and after till 32s. pays 16s. 9d. then 1s.
Oats to 16s. pay 5s. 11·2d. and then pay 9·6d.
Peas to 40s. pay 16s. 7·2d. and then pay 9·6d.
Rye to 36s. pays 20s. and after till 40s. pays 16s. 9d. then 1s.
Wheat to 44s. pays 22s. and after till 53s. 4d. pays 17s. then 9s. till 80s., and after that 1s. 4d.
Saxby’s figures are slightly less, as they take into account a 5 percent discount obtainable on all the subsidies except one. The note appears first in ed. 2. —Cannan ↩︎
Eds. 1 and 2 do not contain “subsequent laws still further increased those duties,” and read “the distress which in years of scarcity the strict execution of this statute might have brought.” ↩︎
These do not seem to have been numerous. There were cases in 1757 and 1766. See the table in Charles Smith, Three Tracts Upon the Corn Trade and Corn Laws, 2nd ed., pp. 44, 45. ↩︎
Eds. 1 and 2 read “extend its cultivation.” ↩︎
Earlier statutes are 15 Hen. VI, c. 2; 20 Hen. VI, c. 6; 23 Hen. VI, c. 6; 1 and 2 P. and M., c. 5; 5 Eliz., c. 5. § 26; 13 Eliz., c. 13; and 1 Jac., c. 25, §§ 26, 27. The preamble of the first of these says “by the law it was ordained that no man might carry nor bring corn out of the realm of England without the King’s licence, for cause whereof farmers and other men which use manurement of their land may not sell their corn but of a bare price to the great damage of all the realm.” Exportation was therefore legalised without licence when grain was above certain prices. ↩︎
C. 7. ↩︎
C. 13. ↩︎
The “Book of Rates” (see this note) rated wheat for export at 20s., oats at 6s. 8d., and other grain at 10s. the quarter, and the duty was a shilling in the pound on these values. ↩︎
1 W. and M., c. 12. The bounty was to be given “without taking or requiring anything for custom.” ↩︎
Because as to inland sale 15 Car. II, c. 7 (above, here), remained in force. ↩︎
The Acts prohibiting exportation were much more numerous than the others. See above, this note, and the table in Charles Smith there referred to. ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “of the greater part of which there was no drawback.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “in one respect.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads only “By this statute the high duties upon importation for home consumption are taken off as soon as the price of wheat is so high as forty-eight shillings the quarter, and instead.” ↩︎
In place of this sentence ed. 1 reads “The home market is in this manner not so totally excluded from foreign supplies as it was before.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads (from the beginning of the paragraph) “By the same statute the old bounty of five shillings upon the quarter of wheat ceases when the price rises so high as forty-four shillings, and upon that of other grain in proportion. The bounties too upon the coarser sorts of grain are reduced somewhat lower than they were before, even at the prices at which they take place.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “The same statute permits at all prices the importation of corn in order to be exported again, duty free; provided it is in the meantime lodged in the king’s warehouse.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 contains an additional sentence, “Some provision is thus made for the establishment of the carrying trade.” ↩︎
This paragraph is not in ed. 1. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads (from the beginning of the paragraph) “But by the same law exportation is prohibited as soon as the price of wheat rises to forty-four shillings the quarter, and that of other grain in proportion. The price seems to be a good deal too low, and there seems to be an impropriety besides in stopping exportation altogether at the very same price at which that bounty which was given in order to force it is withdrawn.” ↩︎
These two sentences are not in ed. 1. ↩︎
E.g., in the British Merchant, 1721, Dedication to vol. iii. ↩︎
With three small exceptions, “British” for “Britons” and “law” for “laws” in art. 1, and “for” instead of “from” before “the like quantity or measure of French wine,” the translation is identical with that given in A Collection of All the Treaties of Peace, Alliance and Commerce Between Great Britain and Other Powers from the Revolution in 1688 to the Present Time, 1772, vol. i, pp. 61, 62. ↩︎
Joseph Baretti, Journey from London to Genoa, Through England, Portugal, Spain and France, 3rd ed., 1770, vol. i, pp. 95, 96, but the amount stated is not so large as in the text above: it is “often” from “thirty to fifty and even sixty thousand pounds,” and not “one week with another” but “almost every week.” The gold all came in the packet boat because it, as a war vessel, was exempt from search. —Raynal, Histoire philosophique, Amsterdam ed. 1773, tom. iii, pp. 413, 414 ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “way.” ↩︎
In 1762. ↩︎
See Dictionaire des Monnoies, tom. ii article Seigneurage, p. 489 par M. Abot de Bazinghen, Conseiller-Commissaire en la Cour des Monnoies à Paris. —Smith
Ed. 1 reads erroneously “tom. i.” The book is Traité des Monnoies et de la jurisdiction de la Cour des Monnoies en forme de dictionnaire, par M. Abot de Bazinghen, Conseiller-Commissaire en la Cour des Monnoies de Paris, 1764, and the page is not 489, but 589. Garnier, in his edition of the Wealth of Nations, vol. v, p. 234, says the book “n’est guère qu’une compilation faite sans soin et sans discernement,” and explains that the mint price mentioned above remained in force a very short time. It having failed to bring bullion to the mint, much higher prices were successively offered, and when the Wealth of Nations was published the seignorage only amounted to about 3 percent. On the silver coin it was then about 2 percent, in place of the 6 percent stated by Bazinghen, p. 590. —Cannan ↩︎
“An act for encouraging of coinage,” 18 Car. II, c. 5. The preamble says, “Whereas it is obvious that the plenty of current coins of gold and silver of this kingdom is of great advantage to trade and commerce; for the increase whereof, your Majesty in your princely wisdom and care hath been graciously pleased to bear out of your revenue half the charge of the coinage of silver money.” ↩︎
Originally enacted for five years, it was renewed by 25 Car. II, c. 8, for seven years, revived for seven years by 1 Jac. II, c. 7, and continued by various Acts till made perpetual by 9 Geo. III, c. 25. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “tear and wear.” ↩︎
Under 19 Geo. II, c. 14, § 2, a maximum of £15,000 is prescribed. ↩︎
“Chiefly” is not in ed. 1. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “that of Congo, Angola and Loango.” ↩︎
P. F. X. de Charlevoix, Histoire de l’Isle Espagnole ou de S. Domingue, 1730, tom. i, p. 99. ↩︎
Histoire Naturelle, tom. xv (1750), pp. 160, 162. ↩︎
P. F. X. de Charlevoix, Histoire de l’Isle Espagnole, tom. i, pp. 35, 36. ↩︎
Histoire de l’Isle Espagnole p. 27. ↩︎
Ed. 1 (in place of these two sentences) reads, “The tax upon silver, indeed, still continues to be a fifth of the gross produce.” Cp. above, here. ↩︎
“That mighty, rich and beautiful empire of Guiana, and … that great and golden city which the Spaniards call El Dorado.” —Ralegh’s Works, ed. Thomas Birch, 1751, vol. ii, p. 141 ↩︎
P. Jos. Gumilla, Histoire naturelle civile et géographique de l’Orénoque, etc., traduite par M. Eidous, 1758, tom. ii, pp. 46, 117, 131, 132, 137, 138, but the sentiment is apparently attributed to the author, who is described on the title page as “de la compagnie de Jésus, supérieur des missions de l’Orénoque,” on the strength of a mistranslation of the French or possibly the original Spanish. If “Dieu permit” were mistranslated “God permit,” the following passage from pp. 137, 138 would bear out the text: “On cherchait une vallée ou un territoire dont les rochers et les pierres étaient d’or, et les Indiens pour flatter la cupidité des Espagnols, et les éloigner en même temps de chez eux, leur peignaient avec les couleurs les plus vives l’or dont ce pavs abondait pour se débarrasser plutôt de ces hôtes incommodes, et Dieu permit que les Espagnols ajoutassent foi à ces rapports, pour qu’ils découvrissent un plus grand nombre de provinces, et que la lumière de l’Evangile pût s’y répandre avec plus de facilité.” ↩︎
Eds. 1–4 reads “support.” ↩︎
Miletus and Crotona. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “its.” ↩︎
Juan and Ulloa, Voyage historique, tom. i, p. 229. ↩︎
In Awnsham and John Churchill’s Collection of Voyages and Travels, 1704, vol. iv, p. 508. ↩︎
Raynal, Histoire Philosophique, Amsterdam ed., 1773, tom. iii, pp. 347–352. ↩︎
Histoire Philosophique, tom. iii, p. 424. ↩︎
Histoire Philosophique, tom. vi, p. 8. ↩︎
A mistake for 1664. ↩︎
P. F. X. de Charlevoix, Histoire et description générale de la Nouvelle France, avec le journal historique d’un voyage dans l’Amérique Septentrionnale, 1744, tom. ii, p. 300, speaks of a population of 20,000 to 25,000 in 1713. Raynal says in 1753 and 1758 the population, excluding troops and Indians, was 91,000. —Histoire philosophique, Amsterdam ed., 1773, tom. vi, p. 137 ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the.” ↩︎
Eds. 1 and 2 read “their.” ↩︎
Jus Majoratus. —Smith
Ed. 1 reads “mayorazzo” in the text and “mayoratus” in the note. —Cannan ↩︎
This and the preceding sentence, beginning “The plenty,” are not in ed. 1. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “The engrossing, however, of uncultivated land, it has already been observed, is the greatest obstruction to its improvement and cultivation, and the labour.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “Its produce in this case.” ↩︎
All Eds. read “present” here and here, but “late” here. See above, this note, and below, here. ↩︎
The figures are evidently from the “very exact account” quoted below, here. ↩︎
Juan and Ulloa, Voyage historique, tom. i, pp. 437–441, give a lurid account of the magnificence of the ceremonial. ↩︎
Maranon in 1755 and Fernambuco four years later. —Raynal, Histoire philosophique, Amsterdam ed., 1773, tom. iii, p. 402 ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “This, however, has.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “said to be.” ↩︎
Iron sometimes at 100 écus the quintal and steel at 150. —Juan and Ulloa, Voyage historique, tom. i, p. 252 ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the same as that of Spain.” ↩︎
The commodities originally enumerated in 12 Car. II, c. 18, § 18, were sugar, tobacco cotton-wool, indigo, ginger, fustic and other dyeing woods. ↩︎
There seems to be some mistake here. The true date is apparently 1739, under the Act 12 Geo. II, c. 30. ↩︎
Ships not going to places south of Cape Finisterre were compelled to call at some port in Great Britain. ↩︎
Garnier, in his note to this passage, tom. iii, p. 323, points out that the islands ceded by the peace of Paris in 1763 were only Grenada and the Grenadines, but that term here includes the other islands won during the war, St. Vincent, Dominica and Tobago, which are mentioned below, here. ↩︎
Rice was put in by 3 and 4 Ann, c. 5, and taken out by 3 Geo. II, c. 28; timber was taken out by 5 Geo. III, c. 45. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1703. ↩︎
Details are given below, here through here, in a chapter not contained in Eds. 1 and 2. ↩︎
23 Geo. II, c. 29. ↩︎
23 Geo. II, c. 29. Anderson, Commerce, AD 1750. ↩︎
Hats under 5 Geo. II, c. 22; wools under 10 and 11 W. III, c. 10. See Anderson, Commerce, AD 1732 and 1699. ↩︎
Details are given below, here through here, in a chapter which was not in Eds. 1 and 2. ↩︎
The quotation is not quite verbatim. The provision is referred to above, here, where, however, see note. ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain the words “they approach more nearly to that character; and.” ↩︎
The Board of Trade and Plantations, in a report to the House of Commons in 1732, insisted on this democratic character of the government of some of the colonies, and mentioned the election of governor by Connecticut and Rhode Island: the report is quoted in Anderson, Commerce, AD 1732. ↩︎
The story is told in the same way in Lectures, p. 97, but Seneca, De ira, lib. iii, cap. 40, and Dio Cassius, Hist., lib. liv., cap. 23, say, not that Augustus ordered all the slaves to be emancipated, but that he ordered all the goblets on the table to be broken. Seneca says the offending slave was emancipated. Dio does not mention emancipation. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “and industry.” ↩︎
The West India merchants and planters asserted, in 1775, that there was capital worth £60,000,000 in the sugar colonies and that half of this belonged to residents in Great Britain. See the Continuation of Anderson’s Commerce, AD 1775. ↩︎
Eds. 1 and 2 do not contain the words “so far as concerns their internal government.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “persecuted.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “with equal injustice.” ↩︎
Raynal, Histoire philosophique, Amsterdam ed., 1773, tom. iii, pp. 323, 324, 326, 327. Justamond’s English trans., vol. ii, p. 442. ↩︎
Velasquez. ↩︎
Cortez. ↩︎
“Salve magna parens frugum, Saturnia tellus, Magna virum.” —Virgil, Georg., ii, 173–174 ↩︎
Eds. 1 and 2 do not contain the words “so far as concerns their internal government.” Cp. this note. ↩︎
“Not” appears first in ed. 3 and seems to have been inserted in error. The other countries are only excluded from a particular market, but the colonies are confined to one. ↩︎
There is an example of revenue being furnished in Xenophon, Anab., V, v, 7, 10. ↩︎
Essay on the Causes of the Decline of the Foreign Trade, Consequently of the Value of the Lands of Britain and on the Means to Restore Both, 2nd ed., 1750, pp. 28–36, et passim. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “rate of the profit.” ↩︎
This passage is much the same as that which concludes book i, ch. ix, above, here; but this is the original, as the other was not in ed. 1. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “with a neighbouring country.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “with a neighbouring country.” ↩︎
These four sentences beginning with “At some of the outports” are not in ed. 1. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “possesses.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 places “a popular measure” here. ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “in all future times.” ↩︎
The date at which the non-importation agreement began to operate. ↩︎
“For the greater security of the valuable cargoes sent to America, as well as for the more easy prevention of fraud, the commerce of Spain with its colonies is carried on by fleets which sail under strong convoys. These fleets, consisting of two squadrons, one distinguished by the name of the Galeons, the other by that of the Flota, are equipped annually. Formerly they took their departure from Seville; but as the port of Cadiz has been found more commodious, they have sailed from it since the year 1720.” —W. Robertson, History of America, bk. viii.; in Works, 1825, vol. vii, p. 372 ↩︎
By the treaty of Kainardji, 1774. ↩︎
In 1773. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “prevent it.” ↩︎
Eds. 1 and 2 read “and employment.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “have entirely conquered.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “own capital.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “extremely fit for a nation that is governed by shopkeepers. Such sovereigns and such sovereigns only.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “their subjects, to found and to maintain.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “is” here and two lines lower down. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “and a great part of that which preceded it.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “seem.” ↩︎
“Aucun des règnes précédents n’a fourni plus de volumes, plus d’anecdotes, plus d’estampes, plus de pièces fugitives, etc. Il y a dans tout cela bien des choses inutiles; mais comme Henri III vivait au milieu de son peuple, aucun détail des actions de sa vie n’a echappé à la curiosité; et comme Paris était le théâtre des principaux événements de la ligue, les bourgeois qui y avaient la plus grande part, conservaient soigneusement les moindres faits qui se passaient sous leurs yeux; tout ce qu’ils voyaient leur paraissait grand, parce qu’ils y participaient, et nous sommes curieux, sur parole, de faits dont la plupart ne faisaient peut-être pas alors une grande nouvelle dans le monde.” —C. J. F. Hénault, Nouvel Abrégé chronologique de l’histoire de France, nouv. éd., 1768, p. 473, AD 1589 ↩︎
Eds. 4 and 5 erroneously insert “to” here. ↩︎
Eds. 1–3 read “was.” ↩︎
Eds. 1–3 read “was.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “nations.” ↩︎
Raynal begins his Histoire philosophique with the words “Il n’y a point eu d’événement aussi intéressant pour l’espèce humaine en général et pour les peuples de l’Europe en particulier, que la découverte du nouveau monde et le passage aux Indes par le Cap de Bonne-Espérance. Alors a commencé une révolution dans le commerce, dans la puissance des nations, dans les mœurs, l’industrie et le gouvernement de tous les peuples.” ↩︎
Above, this section. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “distant employment.” ↩︎
The monopoly of the French East India Company was abolished in 1769. See the Continuation of Anderson’s Commerce, 1801, vol. iv, p. 128. ↩︎
Raynal, Histoire philosophique, ed. Amsterdam, 1773, tom. i, p. 203, gives the original capital as 6,459,840 florins. ↩︎
Eds. 1–3 read “if it was.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the principal branch.” ↩︎
Raynal, Histoire philosophique, 1773, tom. i, p. 178. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “those.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “are said to.” The statement has already been twice made, here and here. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “barbarous.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain these four sentences beginning “It is the interest.” ↩︎
Smith had in his library (see Bonar’s Catalogue, p. 15) William Bolts, Considerations on India Affairs, Particularly Respecting the Present State of Bengal and Its Dependencies, ed. 1772. Pt. i, ch. xiv, of this is “On the general modern trade of the English in Bengal; on the oppressions and monopolies which have been the causes of the decline of trade, the decrease of the revenues, and the present ruinous condition of affairs in Bengal.” At p. 215 we find “the servants of the Company … directly or indirectly monopolise whatever branches they please of the internal trade of those countries.” ↩︎
The interest of every proprietor of India Stock, however, is by no means the same with that of the country in the government of which his vote gives him some influence. See Book V. Chap. i. Part 3d. —Smith
This note appears first in ed. 3, ed. 2 has the following note: “This would be exactly true if those masters never had any other interest but that which belongs to them as Proprietors of India stock. But they frequently have another of much greater importance. Frequently a man of great, sometimes even a man of moderate fortune, is willing to give thirteen or fourteen hundred pounds (the present price of a thousand pounds share in India stock) merely for the influence which he expects to acquire by a vote in the Court of Proprietors. It gives him a share, though not in the plunder, yet in the appointment of the plunderers of India; the Directors, though they make those appointments, being necessarily more or less under the influence of the Court of Proprietors, which not only elects them, but sometimes overrules their appointments. A man of great or even a man of moderate fortune, provided he can enjoy this influence for a few years, and thereby get a certain number of his friends appointed to employments in India, frequently cares little about the dividend which he can expect from so small a capital, or even about the improvement or loss of the capital itself upon which his vote is founded. About the prosperity or ruin of the great empire, in the government of which that vote gives him a share, he seldom cares at all. No other sovereigns ever were, or from the nature of things ever could be, so perfectly indifferent about the happiness or misery of their subjects, the improvement or waste of their dominions, the glory or disgrace of their administration, as, from irresistible moral causes, the greater part of the Proprietors of such a mercantile Company are, and necessarily must be.” This matter with some slight alterations reappears in the portion of bk. v, chap. i, part iii, art. 1st, which was added in ed. 3 below, p. 243. —Cannan ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “ignorance only.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “have commonly been well meaning.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “if.” ↩︎
Eds. 1 and 2 read “were.” ↩︎
This chapter appears first in Additions and Corrections and ed. 3. ↩︎
C. 4. ↩︎
C. 14. ↩︎
3 Car. I, c. 4; 13 and 14 Car. II, c. 19. ↩︎
From Ireland, 12 Geo. II, c. 21; 26 Geo. II, c. 8. Spanish wool for clothing and Spanish felt wool. —Saxby, British Customs, p. 263 ↩︎
6 Geo. III, c. 52, § 20. ↩︎
4 Geo. II, c. 27. ↩︎
9 Geo. III, c. 39, § 1, continued by 14 Geo. III, c. 86, § 11, and 21 Geo. III, c. 29, § 3. ↩︎
15 Geo. III, c. 31, § 10. ↩︎
Smith has here inadvertently given the rates at which the articles were valued in the “Book of Rates,” 12 Car. II, c. 4, instead of the duties, which would be 20 percent on the rates. See below, here. ↩︎
10 Geo. III, c. 38, and 19 Geo. III, c. 27. ↩︎
3 and 4 Ann, c. 10. —Anderson, Commerce, AD 1703 ↩︎
Masting-timber (and also tar, pitch and rosin), under 12 Ann, st. 1, c. 9, and masting-timber only under 2 Geo. II, c. 35, § 12. The encouragement of the growth of hemp in Scotland is mentioned in the preamble of 8 Geo. I, c. 12, and is presumably to be read into the enacting portion. ↩︎
8 Geo. I, c. 12; 2 Geo. II, c. 35, §§ 3, 11. ↩︎
3 Geo. III, c. 25. ↩︎
Additions and Corrections omits “that.” ↩︎
The third bounty. ↩︎
William Hawkins, Treatise of the Pleas of the Crown, 4th ed., 1762, bk. i, chap. 52. ↩︎
So far from doing so, it expressly provides that any greater penalties already prescribed shall remain in force. ↩︎
12 Car. II, c. 32. ↩︎
4 Geo. I, c. 11, § 6. ↩︎
Presumably the reference is to 10 and 11 W. III, c. 10, § 18, but this applies to the commander of a king’s ship conniving at the offence, not to the master of the offending vessel. ↩︎
12 Geo. II, c. 21, § 10. ↩︎
13 and 14 Car. II, c. 18, § 9, forbade removal of wool in any part of the country between 8 p.m. and 4 a.m. from March to September, and 5 p.m. and 7 a.m. from October to February. 7 and 8 W. III, c. 28, § 8, taking no notice of this, enacted the provision quoted in the text. The provision of 13 and 14 Car. II, c. 18, was repealed by 20 Geo. III, c. 55, which takes no notice of 7 and 8 W. III, c. 28. ↩︎
All these provisions are from 7 and 8 W. III, c. 28. ↩︎
9 and 10 W. III, c. 40. ↩︎
The quotation is not verbatim. ↩︎
“It is well known that the real very superfine cloth everywhere must be entirely of Spanish wool.” —Anderson, Commerce, AD 1669 ↩︎
Chronicon Rusticum-Commerciale; or Memoirs of Wool, etc., 1767, vol. ii, p. 418, note. ↩︎
Additions and Corrections reads “the wool.” ↩︎
12 Car. II, c. 32; 13 and 14 Car. II, c. 18. ↩︎
13 and 14 Car. II, c. 18, § 8. The preamble to the clause alleges that “great quantities of fuller’s earth or fulling clay are daily carried and exported under the colour of tobacco-pipe clay.” ↩︎
The preamble says that “notwithstanding the many good laws before this time made and still in force, prohibiting the exportation of leather … by the cunning and subtlety of some persons and the neglect of others who ought to take care thereof; there are such quantities of leather daily exported to foreign parts that the price of leather is grown to those excessive rates that many artificers working leather cannot furnish themselves with sufficient store thereof for the carrying on of their trades, and the poor sort of people are not able to buy those things made of leather which of necessity they must make use of.” ↩︎
20 Car. II, c. 5; 9 Ann., c. 6, § 4. ↩︎
9 Ann., c. 11, § 39, explained by 10 Ann., c. 26, § 6, and 12 Ann., st. 2, c. 9, § 64. ↩︎
Except under certain conditions by 4 Ed. IV, c. 8; wholly by 7 Jac. I, c. 14, § 4. ↩︎
Under 13 and 14 Car. II, c. 18, and 7 and 8 W. III, c. 28; above, p. 147. ↩︎
9 and 10 W. III, c. 28, professedly to prevent frauds. ↩︎
The preamble to the Act next quoted in the text mentions 28 Ed. III, c. 5 (iron); 33 Hen. VIII, c. 7 (brass, copper, etc.), and 2 and 3 Ed. VI, c. 37 (bell-metal, etc.). ↩︎
This Act is not printed in the ordinary collections, but the provision referred to is in Pickering’s index, s.v. Copper, and the clause is recited in a renewing Act, 12 Ann., st. 1, c. 18. ↩︎
Under the general Act, 8 Geo. I, c. 15, mentioned immediately below. ↩︎
12 Car. II, c. 4, § 2, and 14 Car. II, c. 11, § 35. The 1 percent was due on goods exported to ports in the Mediterranean beyond Malaga, unless the ship had sixteen guns and other warlike equipment. See Saxby, British Customs, pp. 48, 51. ↩︎
Sixpence in the pound on the values at which they are rated in the Act. ↩︎
C. 32. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1758. ↩︎
As is stated in the preamble. ↩︎
The facts are given in the preamble to 8 Geo. I, c. 15, § 13. The old subsidy, the new, the one-third and the two-thirds subsidies account for 1s., and the additional impost for 4d. ↩︎
8 Geo. I, c. 15. —Smith
The year should be 1721. —Cannan ↩︎
I.e. the hatters. ↩︎
4 Geo. III, c. 9. ↩︎
Under the same statute, 5 Geo. I, c. 27. ↩︎
This chapter appears first in Additions and Corrections and ed. 3, and is doubtless largely due to Smith’s appointment in 1778 to the Commissionership of Customs (Rae, Life of Adam Smith, p. 320). He had in his library W. Sims and R. Frewin, The Rates of Merchandise, 1782 (see Bonar, Catalogue, p. 27), and probably had access to earlier works, such as Saxby’s British Customs, 1757, which give the duties, etc., at earlier periods as well as references to the Acts of Parliament regulating them. ↩︎
The Économistes or Physiocrats. Quesnay, Mirabeau and Mercier de la Rivière are mentioned below, pp. 171, 177. ↩︎
Ed. 1 places a full stop at “mercantile system” and continues “That system, in its nature and essence a system of restraint and regulation, could scarce fail.” ↩︎
But, see below, here, where the usefulness of the class is said to be admitted. In his exposition of physiocratic doctrine, Smith does not appear to follow any particular book closely. His library contained Du Pont’s Physiocratie, ou constitution naturelle du gouvernement le plus avantageux au genre humain, 1768 (see Bonar, Catalogue, p. 92), and he refers lower down to La Rivière, L’ordre naturel et essentiel des sociétés politiques, 1767, but he probably relied largely on his recollection of conversations in Paris; see Rae, Life of Adam Smith, pp. 215–222. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “tear and wear.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “some other employment.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “degrades.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “repay him.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “above the funds destined.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the greater must likewise be its maintenance and employment.” ↩︎
Misprinted “greater” in ed. 5. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “of their foreign trade.” ↩︎
See François Quesnay, Tableau Œconomique, 1758, reproduced in facsimile for the British Economic Association, 1894. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “at least to all appearance.” ↩︎
L’ordre naturel et essentiel des sociétés politiques, 1767, a quarto of 511 pages, seems, as G. Schelle (Du Pont de Nemours et l’école physiocratique, 1888, p. 46, note) remarks, not entitled to be called a “little book,” but Smith may have been thinking of the edition in two vols., 12mo, 1767, nominally printed “à Londres chez Jean Nourse, libraire.” ↩︎
“Trois grandes inventions principales ont fondé stablement les sociétés, indépendamment de tant d’autres qui les ont ensuite dotées et décorées. Ces trois sont, 1° L’invention de l’écriture, qui seule donne à l’humanité le pouvoir de transmettre, sans altération, ses lois, ses pactes, ses annales et ses découvertes. 2° Celle de la monnaie, qui lie tous les rapports entre les sociétés policées. La troisième enfin, qui est due à notre âge, et dont nos neveux profiteront, est un derivé des deux autres, et les complette également en perfectionnant leur objet: c’est la découverte du Tableau économique, qui devenant désormais le truchement universel, embrasse, et accorde toutes les portions ou quotités correlatives, qui doivent entrer dans tous les calculs généraux de l’ordre économique.” —Philosophie Rurale ou économie générale et politique de l’agriculture, pour servir de suite a l’Ami des Hommes, Amsterdam, 1766, tom. i, pp. 52, 53 ↩︎
Du Halde, Description Géographique, etc., de la Chine, tom. ii, p. 64. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “Mr. Langlet.” ↩︎
See the Journal of Mr. De Lange in Bell’s Travels, vol. ii. p. 258, 276 and 293. —Smith
Travels from St. Petersburg in Russia to Divers Parts of Asia, by John Bell of Antermony, Glasgow, 1763. The mandarins requested the Russians to cease “from importuning the council about their beggarly commerce,” p. 293. Smith was a subscriber to this book. The note is not in ed. 1. —Cannan ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “sorts.” ↩︎
Quesnay went further than this: “L’historien dit que le commerce qui se fit dans l’intérieur de la Chine est si grand que celui de l’Europe ne peut pas lui être comparé.” —Oeuvres, ed. Oncken, 1888, p. 603 ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “as well as all the other.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “and in.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “of.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “from.” ↩︎
Montesquieu, Esprit des lois, liv. iv, chap. 8. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “that.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “more rich.” ↩︎
Lectures, p. 231; Montesquieu, Esprit des lois, liv. xv, chap. 8. ↩︎
Plin. —Smith
Historia Naturalis l. ix c. 39. —Cannan ↩︎
Plin. —Smith
Historia Naturalis l. viii c. 48. —Smith
Neither this nor the preceding note is in ed. 1. —Cannan ↩︎
John Arbuthnot, Tables of Ancient Coins, Weights and Measures, 2nd ed., 1754, pp. 142–145. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “real value.” ↩︎
Lectures, p. 14. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “is.” ↩︎
What Thucydides says (ii, 97) is that no European or Asiatic nation could resist the Scythians if they were united. Ed. 1 reads here and on next page “Thucidides.” ↩︎
Lectures, pp. 20, 21. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “a good deal of.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “or fifth.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “so short a.” ↩︎
VII, 27. ↩︎
Livy, v, 2. ↩︎
Livy, iv, 59 ad fin. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “never can.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “at whose expense they are employed.” Repeated all but verbatim below, here. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “is acquired.” ↩︎
As ed. 1 was published at the beginning of March, 1776, this must have been written less than a year after the outbreak of the war, which lasted eight years. ↩︎
The Seven Years’ War, 1756–1763. Ed. 1 reads “of which in the last war the valour appeared.” ↩︎
“This” is probably a misprint for “his,” the reading of Eds. 1–3. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “which.” ↩︎
Almost certainly a misprint for “demonstrate,” the reading of ed. 1. ↩︎
Lectures, p. 29. “Cromwel,” which is Hume’s spelling, appears first in ed. 4 here, but above, here, it is so spelt in all editions. [S.E. Editor’s note: The spelling has been normalized to “Cromwell” across this entire edition.] ↩︎
Lectures, p. 263. ↩︎
Hume, History, ed. of 1773, vol. ii, p. 432, says the “furious engine,” artillery, “though it seemed contrived for the destruction of mankind and the overthrow of empires, has in the issue rendered battles less bloody, and has given greater stability to civil societies,” but his reasons are somewhat different from those in the text above. This part of the chapter is evidently adapted from Part iv “Of Arms” in the Lectures, pp. 260–264, and the dissertation on the rise, progress and fall of militarism in Part i, pp. 26–34. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “or.” ↩︎
Misprinted “their” in Eds. 4 and 5. ↩︎
Lectures, p. 10. ↩︎
Lectures, p. 15: “Till there be property there can be no government, the very end of which is to secure wealth and to defend the rich from the poor.” Cp. Locke, Civil Government, § 94, “government has no other end but the preservation of property.” ↩︎
They are to be found in Tyrrel’s History of England. —Smith
General History of England, Both Ecclesiastical and Civil, by James Tyrrell, vol. ii, 1700, pp. 576–579. The king is Richard I, not Henry II. —Cannan ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “except when they stand in need of the interposition of his authority in order to protect them from the oppression of some of their fellow subjects.” ↩︎
Iliad, ix, 149–156, but the presents are not the “sole advantage” mentioned. ↩︎
The extraordinary accent here and seven lines lower down appears first in ed. 2. ↩︎
Smith was in Toulouse from February or March, 1764, to August, 1765. —Rae, Life of Adam Smith, pp. 174, 175, 188 ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “tear and wear.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “seems to be capable.” ↩︎
Since publishing the two first editions of this book, I have got good reasons to believe that all the turnpike tolls levied in Great Britain do not produce a neat revenue that amounts to half a million; a sum which, under the management of Government, would not be sufficient to keep in repair five of the principal roads in the kingdom. —Smith
This and the next note appear first in ed. 3. —Cannan ↩︎
I have now good reasons to believe that all these conjectural sums are by much too large. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads here and two lines lower down “tear and wear.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “partly in the six days’ labour.” ↩︎
Here and in the next sentence for “the labour of the country people,” ed. 1 reads “the six days’ labour.” ↩︎
Voyages de François Bernier, Amsterdam, 1710, can scarcely be said to discredit the ordinary eulogy of Indian roads and canals by an account of any particular works, but it does so by not mentioning them in places where it would be natural to do so if they had existed or been remarkable. See tom. ii, p. 249, “les grandes rivières qui en ces quartiers n’ont ordinairement point de ponts.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “or.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “tyranny by which the intendant chastises any parish or communauté which has had the misfortune to fall under his displeasure.” ↩︎
This section (ending on here) appears first in Additions and Corrections and ed. 3. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1606. ↩︎
Commerce, AD 1620, and cp. AD 1623. ↩︎
Sir Josiah Child, New Discourse of Trade, etc., chap. iii, divides companies into those in joint stock and those “who trade not by a joint stock, but only are under a government and regulation.” ↩︎
The company or society of the Merchant Adventurers of England. ↩︎
Additions and Corrections reads “Russian,” probably a misprint, though “Russian,” which is incorrect, appears on the next page. ↩︎
Eds. 1–3 read “restraints.” ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1643: the fine was doubled in that year, being raised to £100 for Londoners and £50 for others. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1661, under which the other two years are also mentioned. ↩︎
Additions and Corrections and Eds. 3 and 4 read “has.” Smith very probably wrote “there has been no complaint.” ↩︎
The preamble recites the history of the company. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1672. ↩︎
New Discourse of Trade, chap. iii, quoted by Anderson, Commerce, AD 1672. This part of the book was not published till long after 1672, but seems to have been written before the closing of the Exchequer in that year. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1605, 1643, 1753. ↩︎
Additions and Corrections reads “extensive.” ↩︎
See the preamble to 26 Geo. II, c. 18. —Anderson, Commerce, AD 1753 ↩︎
New Discourse of Trade, chap. iii. ↩︎
Additions and Corrections reads “all the other.” ↩︎
A joint-stock company here is an incorporated or chartered company. The common application of the term to other companies is later. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1723. ↩︎
It stood at this amount from 1746 to the end of 1781, but was then increased by a call of 8 percent. —Anderson, Commerce, AD 1746, and (Continuation) AD 1781 ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1672 and AD 1698. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1670. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1698. ↩︎
10 Ann., c. 27. Anderson, Commerce, AD 1712. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1730. The annual grant continued till 1746. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1733. ↩︎
23 Geo. II, c. 31; 25 Geo. II, c. 40; Anderson, Commerce, AD 1750, 1752; above, here. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1618, 1631 and 1662. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1743, quoting Captain Christopher Middleton. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1670. ↩︎
“Eight or nine private merchants do engross nine-tenth parts of the company’s stock.” Anderson, Commerce, AD 1743, quoting from An Account of the Countries Adjoining to Hudson’s Bay … with an Abstract of Captain Middleton’s Journal and Observations Upon His Behaviour, by Arthur Dobbs, Esq., 1744, p. 58. ↩︎
In his Account, pp. 3 and 58, he talks of 2,000 percent, but this, of course, only refers to the difference between buying and selling prices. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1743, but the examination is not nearly so comprehensive, nor the expression of opinion so ample as is suggested by the text. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1713. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1731, 1732 and 1734. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1724 and 1732. But there was no successful voyage; the company were “considerable losers in every one” of the eight years. ↩︎
By 9 Geo. I, c. 6. Anderson, Commerce, AD 1723. ↩︎
This was done by 6 Geo. II, c. 28. Anderson, Commerce, AD 1733. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1732 and AD 1733. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1748 and AD 1750. ↩︎
“Until this time the English East India trade was carried on by several separate stocks, making particular running-voyages; but in this year they united all into one general joint-capital stock.” Anderson, Commerce, AD 1612. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1693. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1676. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1681 and AD 1685. ↩︎
The whole of this history is in Anderson, Commerce, AD 1698. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1701. ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1730. ↩︎
“This coalition was made on the 22nd of July, 1702, by an indenture tripartite between the Queen and the said two companies.” —Anderson, Commerce, AD 1702 ↩︎
6 Ann., c. 17. Anderson, Commerce, AD 1708. ↩︎
7 Geo. III, c. 49, and 8 Geo. III, c. 11. ↩︎
In 1772–3. Additions and Corrections and ed. 3 read “subjects.” ↩︎
13 Geo. III, c. 63. ↩︎
House of Commons Journals, April 27, 1773. ↩︎
The spelling in other parts of the work is “neat.” The Additions and Corrections read “nett” both here and five lines above. The discrepancy was obviously noticed in one case and not in the other. ↩︎
Examen de la réponse de M. N —Smith
Necker —Cannan Au Mémoire de M. l’Abbé Morellet, sur la Compagnie des Indes, par l’auteur du Mémoire, 1769, pp. 35–38. ↩︎
6 Ann., c. 22. ↩︎
At least as against private persons, Anderson, Commerce, AD 1720. ↩︎
Eds. 4 and 5 insert “it” here, by a misprint. ↩︎
Additions and Corrections and ed. 3 read “was.” ↩︎
Anderson, Commerce, AD 1690, 1704, 1710, 1711. ↩︎
This section, beginning here, appears first in Additions and Corrections and ed. 3. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the youth” as in the first line of the text. ↩︎
Eds. 1–4 read “is.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the year.” ↩︎
Rae, Life of Adam Smith, p. 48, thinks Smith’s salary at Glasgow may have been about £70 with a house, and his fees near £100. ↩︎
Eds. 1 and 2 read “in physic.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “the.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “and they still continue to be so in some universities.” ↩︎
“Necessarily” and “naturally” are transposed in ed. 1. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “those.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “Those two chapters were.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads, “What was called Metaphysics or Pneumatics was set in opposition to Physics, and was cultivated.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “of.” ↩︎
Hist., vi, 56; xviii, 34. ↩︎
Ant. Rom., ii, xxiv to xxvii, esp. xxvi. ↩︎
Repub., iii, 400–401. ↩︎
Politics, 1340 a. ↩︎
Hist., iv, 20. ↩︎
Esprit des lois, liv. iv, chap. viii, where Plato, Aristotle and Polybius are quoted. ↩︎
Iliad, xiii, 137; xviii, 494, 594; Odyssey, i, 152; viii, 265; xviii, 304; xxiii, 134. ↩︎
Ed. 1 places “those parents” here. ↩︎
Plutarch, Life of Solon, quoted by Montesquieu, Esprit des Lois, liv., xxvi, ch. v. ↩︎
The words “one of” do not occur in Eds. 1 and 2. They are perhaps a misprint for “some of” or a misreading suggested by a failure to understand that “his own life” is that of Marcus Antoninus. See Lucian, Eunuchus, iii. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the minds of men are not.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “from.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “as it is capable of being.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the use of those members.” ↩︎
Eds. 1–3 read “is.” ↩︎
In Discourses on the First Decade of Titus Livius, book iii, chap. i. ↩︎
The original reads “finances, armies, fleets.” ↩︎
Hume, History, chap. xxix, vol. iv, pp. 30, 31, in ed. of 1773, which differs verbally both from earlier and from later editions. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “of each sect.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the most numerous sect.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “of each sect.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “Roman Catholic church.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “and.” ↩︎
These nine words are not in ed. 1. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “great and consistorial.” ↩︎
Daniel, Histoire de France, 1755, tom. vii, pp. 158, 159; tom. ix, p. 40. ↩︎
“Il ne lui resta que deux domestiques pour le servir et lui préparer à manger, encore faisaient-ils passer par le feu les plats où il mangeait, et les vases où il buvait pour les purifier, comme ayant été fouillés par un homme retranché de la communion des fidèles.” —Daniel, Histoire de France, 1755 tom. iii, pp. 305–306. Hénault’s account is similar, Nouvel Abrégé chronologique, 1768, tom. i, p. 114, AD 996. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “by the general prevalence of those doctrines.” ↩︎
Eds. 1 and 2 read “take party.” ↩︎
The “Act concerning Patronages,” 53rd of the second session of the first parliament of William and Mary, is doubtless meant, but this is a separate Act from the “Act ratifying the Confession of Faith and settling Presbyterian Church Government,” Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, 1822, vol. ix, pp. 133, 196. ↩︎
The preamble of the Act mentions “the great hardship upon the patrons” as well as the “great heats and divisions.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “small benefice.” ↩︎
Voltaire’s expression is not quite so strong as it is represented. He says in the catalogue of writers in the Siècle de Louis XIV, “Porée (Charles), né en Normandie en 1675, Jésuite, du petit nombre des professeurs qui ont eu de la célébrité chez les gens du monde. Eloquent dans le goût de Sénèque, poéte et très bel esprit. Son plus grand mérite fut de faire aimer les lettres et la vertu à ses disciples. Mort en 1741.” ↩︎
Quaere as to Suetonius. Ed. 1 continues here “Several of those whom we do not know with certainty to have been public teachers appear to have been private tutors. Polybius, we know, was private tutor to Scipio Æmilianus; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, there are some probable reasons for believing, was so to the children of Marcus and Quintus Cicero.” ↩︎
The Lectures leave little doubt that this is a fragment of autobiography. ↩︎
Ed. 5 reads “expenses,” but this seems to be a misprint or misreading suggested by the fact that several expenses have been mentioned. ↩︎
See Memoires concernant les Droits & Impositions en Europe: tom. i page 73. This work was compiled by the order of the court for the use of a commission employed for some years past in considering the proper means for reforming the finances of France. The account of the French taxes, which takes up three volumes in quarto, may be regarded as perfectly authentic. That of those of other European nations was compiled from such informations as the French ministers at the different courts could procure. It is much shorter, and probably not quite so exact as that of the French taxes. —Smith
The book is by Moreau de Beaumont, Paris, 1768–9, 4 vols., 4to. The correct title of vol. i is Mémoires concernant les Impositions et Droits en Europe; vols. ii.-iv are Mémoires concernant les Impositions et Droits, 2nde. Ptie., Impositions et Droits en France. Smith obtained his copy through Turgot, and attached great value to it, believing it to be very rare. See Bonar, Catalogue, p. 10. —Cannan ↩︎
History of Florence, book viii, ad fin. ↩︎
Details are given above, here, but that is in a passage which appears first in ed. 3. ↩︎
See Memoires concernant les Droits & Impositions en Europe; tom. i. p. 73. ↩︎
The figures are those of the Land Tax Acts. ↩︎
See on these estimates Sir Robert Giffen, Growth of Capital, 1889, pp. 89, 90. ↩︎
See Sketches of the History of Man 1774, by Henry Home, Lord Kames, vol. i page 474 & seq. —Smith
This author at the place quoted gives six “general rules” as to taxation:—
“That wherever there is an opportunity of smuggling taxes ought to be moderate.”
“That taxes expensive in the levying ought to be avoided.”
“To avoid arbitrary taxes.”
“To remedy” inequality of riches “as much as possible, by relieving the poor and burdening the rich.”
“That every tax which tends to impoverish the nation ought to be rejected with indignation.”
“To avoid taxes that require the oath of party.”
—Cannan ↩︎
In ed. 1 “as they could contrive” comes here instead of three lines earlier. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “is imposed according to.” For the origin of the stereotyped assessment of the land tax, see Cannan, History of Local Rates in England, 1896, pp. 114–119. ↩︎
Ed. 2 reads “They contribute.” ↩︎
Ed. 1, beginning after “the same revenue,” six lines higher up, reads “As the tax does not rise with the rise of the rent, the sovereign does not share in the profits of the landlord’s improvements. The tax therefore does not discourage those improvements.” ↩︎
Memoires Concernant les Droits tom. i p. 240, 241. ↩︎
Memoires Concernant les Droits, etc. tom. i. p. 114, 115, 116, etc. ↩︎
Memoires Concernant les Droits, pp. 117–119. ↩︎
Memoires Concernant les Droits, etc. tom. i p. 83, 84 and 79. ↩︎
Memoires Concernant les Droits, p. 280, etc. also p. 287, etc. to 316. ↩︎
As stated just above. ↩︎
Mémoires, tom. i, p. 282. ↩︎
Misprinted “tallie” here and five lines lower down in Eds. 2–5. ↩︎
Memoires concernant les Droits etc. tom. ii p. 139, etc. pp. 145–147. ↩︎
31 Geo. II, c. 12, continued by 5 Geo. III, c. 18. ↩︎
Genesis 47:26. ↩︎
Eds. 1–4 read “a fifth.” ↩︎
Since the first publication of this book, a tax nearly upon the above-mentioned principles has been imposed. —Smith
This note appears first in ed. 3. The tax was first imposed by 18 Geo. III, c. 26, and was at the rate of 6d. in the pound on houses of £5 and under £50 annual value, and 1s. in the pound on houses of higher value, but by 19 Geo. III, c. 59, the rates were altered to 6d. in the pound on houses of £5 and under £20 annual value, 9d. on those of £20 and under £40, and 1s. on those of £40 and upwards. —Cannan ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “the houses.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain this sentence. ↩︎
Memoires concernant les Droits, etc. tom. i p. 223. ↩︎
Memoires concernant les Droits, tom. i. p. 74. ↩︎
The Mémoires only say “La taille consiste dans le quart pour cent que tout habitant, sans exception, est obligé de payer de tout ce qu’il possède en meubles et immeubles. Il ne se fait aucune répartition de cette taille. Chaque bourgeois se cottise lui-même et porté son imposition à la maison de ville, et on n’exige autre chose de lui, sinon le serment qu’il est obligé de faire que ce qu’il paye forme véritablement ce qu’il doit acquitter.” But Lord Kames, Sketches of the History of Man, vol. i, p. 476, says, “Every merchant puts privately into the public chest, the sum that, in his own opinion, he ought to contribute.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “Underwold.” ↩︎
Ed. 5 adds “it” here, doubtless a misprint. ↩︎
Memoires concernant les Droits, tom. i. p. 163, 166, 171. —Smith
The statements as to the confidence felt in these self-assessments are not taken from the Mémoires. —Cannan ↩︎
Proposed by Legge in 1759. See Dowell, History of Taxation and Taxes in England, 1884, vol. ii, p. 137. ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “a.” ↩︎
Memoires concernant les Droits, etc. tom. ii. p. 17. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “nor to.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “West India.” ↩︎
E.g., by Montesquieu, Esprit des lois, liv., xiii, chap. xiv. ↩︎
17 Geo. III, c. 39. ↩︎
This paragraph is not in ed. 1. ↩︎
Lib. 55 [25] quoted by Burman and Bouchaud. See also Burman De Vectigalibus Pop. Rom. cap. xi in Utriusque thesauri antiquitatum romanarum graecarumque nova supplementa congesta ab Joanne Poleno, Venice, 1737, vol. i, p. 1032B and Bouchaud de l’impôt du vingtieme sur les successions et de l’impôt sur les marchandises chez les Romains, nouv. ed., 1772, pp. 10 sqq. —Smith ↩︎
See Memoires concernant les Droits, etc. tom. i. p. 225. ↩︎
All Eds. read “fiftieth,” but the Mémoires say “quinzième” and the “only” in the next sentence shows that Smith intended to write “fifteenth.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “very.” ↩︎
Memoires concernant les Droits, etc. tom. i. p. 154. ↩︎
Memoires concernant les Droits, etc. tom. i. p. 157. ↩︎
Memoires concernant les Droits, etc. tom. i. p. 223, 224, 225. ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “or the mortgage.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 reads “give only.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “neat.” ↩︎
The word is used in its older sense, equivalent to the modern “pamphlets.” See Murray, Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “in proportion to the tax.” ↩︎
Ed. 1 does not contain “in that proportion.” ↩︎
Memoires concernant les Droits, etc. tom. ii. p. 108. ↩︎
Memoires concernant les Droits, tom. iii really i p. 87. ↩︎
“Was supposed to be” is equivalent to “was nominally but not really.” ↩︎