Page:Craik History of British Commerce Vol 2.djvu/157

Rh certainly be lessoned." "On the whole," Davenant concludes, " the truth of the case appears to be, that, especially during this last war (while our trade with France and Spain has been interrupted), large quantities of the woollen manufactures, com, tin, tobacco, with divers other commodities, have been sent to Holland, which goods in the former course of trade we exported directly ourselves, and mostly in our own shipping, to the increase of our navigation, which the war having rendered difficult, and their ports being less exposed than our's to the danger of privateers, as well in ships outward as homeward bound, the Hollanders have in a great measure got to be the carriers of our goods; but, as our exports thither have increased all along, so our exports to other parts must, in proportion, have diminished, and what we seem to have gained in our dealings there we have lost in the general balance of our trade with other countries." Taking the year 1703, it appears that the value of our exports to all foreign parts was 6,644,103l., while that of our exports to Holland alone was 2,417,890l., or more than a third of the whole. Of the 2.417,890l. there was exported in English bottoms 1,502,169l., and in foreign bottoms 915,720l. Of the imports from Holland for that year, to the value of 289,844l. was brought in English, and 232,568l. in foreign vessels. And these same proportions Davenant believes would nearly hold for other years. We may hence perceive the extent to which the carrying trade, both in goods for the English market and in English produce and manufactures, was at this time in the hands of foreigners, and principallv of the Dutch.

As for the prevalent notion which Davenant takes so much pains to combat, that this trade with Holland must needs be a profitable one, simply because our exports so much exceeded our imports, it was as irrational as it would be to maintain that the productive labourer must always be a greater gainer upon the article he produces than the capitalist who employs him. The Dutch here stood in the position of the capitalist, and the English of the labourer. The former, in fact, employed the latter