A pamphlet has just appea...
The Times, 1824-10-09T00:00:00

A pamphlet has just appeared, entitled an " z}istorical Eisay on the British Dominion in India," written by M. SAY, one of the ablest political economists of Europe. This little popular work is intended to make the people of the Contineint, andl particularly the coulitrymeen or the author, better acquaiited with the condition and resources of our In- dian einpire. The result of his speculations seems to be, that India is of no use to Great Britain, eitherin a politisal orcom- mercial point of view-a doctrine whicil the friends of the Company may as ardently desire to see believed on the Con- tinent as they would deprecate the belief in England. The pamnphlet of M. SAY, if it succeeded in establishing the faith of this fact in France and Russia, would (lo more for the safetyfof British India, by removingjealousies and allaying ambition, than several millioins of additional reveniue, or several thousands of freshl troops. After giving a rapid sketch of the history of British power in India, and of the present situatiain of the Com- paniy's dominions, M. SAY proceeds to state tha relationis which connect these dovninions with the- parent state, to tliscuss the pecuniary advantages vhich the Comlpanxy and England derive from the possession of their castern empire, and to i;quire whether our power and resources would be diminished by its loss. WVe can oaly find loom for the following observations, whilch nmust be all6wed to be acute and judicious. He ha(l stated, that England cxBended great sums for the con- quest and protection of India, and he then asks-- " What compensation, except that of vanity, can England derive forall these losses? In other words, what are the advantages that may fairly be regardedl as arising from the East ln(lia Company, and Indian empire? Are they the dividends paid to 5ndia proprie. tors ? Even supposing they were paid, not by loans, but wholly from actual profits, is it to be supposed that the free merchants, who would carry on the trade if the Company did not exist, would have no profit on the goods they would supply to England and the other Luropean states ? It is more than probable that, when the balance was struck, they would draw a greater profit than 10. per cent. on the capital they had embarked in it. That profit, therefore, should ! not be viewed as exclusively attached to the present establishment. were there no such company, there would be no money borrowed to pay its divilend; but the equivalent of this dividend woould be equally certain to be shared among the English rAerchants. "The same calculation applies to the profits on the English ma- nufacture3 exported tO India. Supposing the Company put'down, free traders would carry nearly the same articles to India, and would derive the same profits. These profits, therefore, arc not dependent on the Company, nor on the losses it sustains. The same reasoning applies to the manufactures of the East. which the English sell to the other nations of Europe. The sale would not be less, although there were no such Company in ex- istence. " With respect to the Custom-house duties paid on the Company's importations, the same reasoning still applies. There is, however, a material difference between the privileged trade and that of indivi- duals; for the Compasy always owes apart of the duties, which debt it will never pay; whilst individuals ali pay ready money, because no credit will be given them by the Custom-house. *' Finally, as a compensation for the losses sustained by the Com- pany as a body, as weU as by the nation which supports itb we are told of the profits of all sorts made by its servants; and certainly, if there were no Company, or no English Government in India, there would be no servants. It may be said, indeed, that besides the heads of establishments, free trade must have its agents; but I am con- vinced they would gain little in comparison vwith these of the Cam- pany. lIere, then, is a positive gain. The Company loses, or is the cause of a loss to the English nation, of a sum of two milions, more or less, annually; but its servants gain, perhaps, te the amount of half a million. This is the sum-total of what this celebrated Com- pany adds to the wealth of 6ngland; were it not for the Company, she would not purchase every year half a million of profit with two millions and a half of loss." We are sorry to see that M. SAY'S ideas of the Government of India-of the poWer of the Indian Direction-alid the composition and influenice of the Board of Control, are not so correct as his knowledge of the trade and resources of our eastern possessionis, as will be evident from the fol- lowing quotation, where he ascribes too rmtich influence to the Government, and leaves, too little to the sovereigns of Leadenhall:_ " The Directors, who sit in London, have the appearance of go- verning, by their agenta, the territories of. the Company-, because their agents are paid by them; but, in 1784, the Mlinister was authorized by Parliament to formn a permanent, council, under the nsane of the Board of Control, which is generaly composed of the Primae Minister and his dependents. With this council the Directors must concert respecting all appointments, aud'all military and poli- tical operations. In fact, the Board of Control rules India. The Directors are independent only 8o far as respects commercidal opera tions. The nomination to all vacant places, whether in Europe or Asia, or their confirmation to the possessors, adds rquch tCJ the in. flience of the Crown."