702

THE NATURE AND CAUSES OF

end of the reign of Charles II . through the whole of that of•lames II, and during a part of that of William III . reducedthem to great distress. In 1G98, a proposal was made toparliament of advancing two millions to government at eightper cent, provided the subscribers were erected into a newEast India Company with exclusive privileges. The old EastIndia Company offered seven hundred thousand pounds,nearly the amount of their capital, at four per cent, upon thesame conditions. But such was at that time the state of pub-lic credit, that it was more convenient for government toborrow two millions at eight per cent, than seven hundredthousand pounds at four. The proposal of the new sub-scribers was accepted, and a new East India Company esta-blished in consequence. The old East India Company , how-ever, had a right to continue their trade till 1701. They had,at the same, in the name of their treasurer, subscribed veryartfully, three hundred and fifteen thousand pounds into thestock of the new. By a negligence in the expression of theact of parliament, which vested the East India trade in thesubscribers to this loan of two millions, it did not appear evi-dent that they were all obliged to unite into a joint stock.A few private traders, whose subscription amounted only toseven thousand two hundred pounds, insisted upon the pri-vilege of trading separately upon their own stocks and attheir own risk. The old East India Company had a right to aseparate trade upon their whole stock till 1701; and they hadlikewise, both before and after that period, a right, like thatof other private traders, to a separate trade upon the three hun-dred and fifteen thousand pounds, which they had subscribedinto the stock of the new company. The competition of thetwo companies with the private traders, and with one another,is said to have well nigh ruined both. Upon a subsequentoccasion, in 1730, when a proposal was made to parliamentfor putting the trade under the management of a regulatedcompany, and thereby laying it in some measure open, theEast India Company , in opposition to tliis proposal, repre-sented in very strong terms, what had been, at this time, themiserable effects, as they thought them, of this competition.In India , they said, it raised the price of goods so high, thatthey were not worth the buying; and in England, by over-stocking the market, it sunk their price so low, that no profitcould be made by them. That by a more plentiful supply,to the great advantage and conveniency of the public, it must