13
in her alliances with maritime and trading states, for the purpose of defence,and commercial intercourse ; but that should any great power endeavour todisturb the tranquillity of Europe , that it then became the duty and interestof Britain to enter into defensive alliances with the minor states, to defeatsuch objects. He then predicts the distance at which any prospect of tran-quillity in France was to be contemplated, and goes on to doubt the policyof our treaties with Portugal ; thinking that if these were abrogated, thattve should import better and cheaper wines and fruits from other countries ;■whilst he considers the idea of our obtaining, with greater facility, the pre-cious metals from this country, as illusory, as these are sure to appear in acommercial country whenever there is a demand for them. Russia , as apower possessed of inordinate ambition, he seems to regard as an ineligibleally for Britain ; and he lauds the policy of the British ministry as judicious,in having shown comparative indifference as to concluding a - commercialtreaty with her.”*
“ An Essay entitled , Observations on the Treaties of Commerce between Great Britain and Foreign States.
“ Although not easy to determine (observes Mr. Macintosh in this Essay),a priori, on which side the advantage may preponderate, still it almostalways happens, that in every treaty of commerce one party derives advan-tages over the other. Thus, by the treaty of commerce concluded withPortugal in 1703, all that Britain gained was the admission of her woollenmanufactures, which had previously been prohibited, whilst Portugal gainedfar more than a counterbalancing advantage by the admission of her winesupon paying a less duty than a third paid by those of France . In thisinstance we granted a monopoly; for, although our woollen goods wereadmitted into Portugal , those the produce of other countries were not pro-hibited, nor were ours admitted on better terms than any other.)
“Mr. Macintosh treats as fallacious the idea that England derives anybenefit from the surplus gold of Portugal being received in exchange forher manufactures, arguing that specie will diffuse itself uniformly in pro-portion to the quantity of labour which a country can command; and thatif population, trade, and manufactures are maintained, there is little reasonto apprehend a scarcity of specie.
“Mr. Macintosh proceeds next to the consideration of the treaty con-cluded on the 26 th of September, 1786, by Mr. Eden on the part of Britain ,and by M. Gerard de Rayneval on the part of France . He seems to think that
* It will be borne in mind, that these remarks many years preceded the publi-cation of Lord Brougham ’s “ Colonial Policy,” and Gentze’s “Fragments on theBalance of Power.” —Ed.
f This treaty, which still subsists between Great Britain and Portugal , is called
the Methuen treaty, from its having been signed by-Methuen, Esq., ancestor
of the present Lord Methuen. In the midst of the operation of the “ free trade”mania, it is deplorable to perceive, that the weak and profligate governments ofSpain and Portugal are tamely suffered, by that of Britain , to violate the treatiesby which the British government guaranteed the payment of the miserable British subjects who were inveigled, by the dastardly “ quadruple alliance,” into the serviceof the pitiful despots of the Peninsula ; and at the same time to claim the privi-lege, under this foolish Methuen treaty, of preventing any approximation to freetrade between France and England.— Ed.