Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 39.djvu/293

 'he had lived long in Italy.' In 1612 (29 Dee.) Mun married at St. Mary's Woolchurch Haw, London, Ursula, daughter of John Malcott, esq., of Bedfordshire. He settled in the parish of St. Helen's, Bishopsgate. In July 1615, as a well-known merchant, he was elected a member of the committee or a director of the East India Company, and he spent his life in actively promoting its interests.

In 1621 Mun published 'A Discourse of Trade, from England unto the East Indies; answering to diverse Objections which are usually made against the same. By T. M.' The work, which is extremely rare, contains references to the events of 1612 (at p. 47) and 1620 (pp. 20, 38). But McCulloch (Lit. of Pol. Econ. pp. 98-9) vaguely and erroneously suggested that the first edition appeared in 1609. A second edition, described on the title-page as 'The Second impression, corrected and amended,' is, like the first, dated 1621. It was reprinted in Purchas's 'Pilgrimes' in 1625, and again in 1856 by the Political Economy Club, in a volume of reprints of early English tracts on commerce, with a preface by McCulloch.

In his book Mun fully describes and defends the transactions of the East India Company. Complaints had been made that the carrying abroad of coin, under the company's patent, caused scarcity of it in England; but Mun argued. that the exportation of specie was compatible with the due maintenance of an excess in the value of exports from this country over that of imports. The maintenance of that excess was an essential part of the currently accepted theory of the 'balance of trade.' The question of the alleged scarcity of coin was brought before parliament in 1621, and Mun appears to have submitted to the government statements entitled, in words which occur in his book, 'Reasons to prove that the trade from England unto the East Indies doth not consume, but rather increase the treasure of this kingdom' (see Cal. State Papers, Colon. Series, East Indies, 1617-21, 1023, pp. 431-2, and 1622-4, 155-8, pp. 68-9). In November 1621 Mun declined on private grounds a request of the court directors of the East India Company to proceed to India to inspect their factories.

In 1622 Edward Misselden [q. v.]—who was possibly a friend of Mun, for the families of both were connected with Hackney and the East India Company—attacked in his 'Free Trade' a proposal made by Gerard Malynes [q. v.] (Consuetudo, vel Lex Mercatorla) to regulate compulsorily the course of exchange, as a means of controlling the 'Balance of trade.' Malynes in his reply (Maintenance of Free Trade, 1622, p. 27) questioned the accuracy of Mun's published views. Misselden in return defended Mun in 'The Circle of Commerce,' 1623; and (pp. 36-7) remarked of him that 'his observation of the East India trade, his judgement in all trade, his diligence at home, his experience abroad, have adorn'd him with such endowments, as are rather to bee wisht in all, then easie to bee found in many Merchants of these times.' Malynes, in another treatise, 'The Centre of the Circle of Commerce,' 1623, again assailed Misselden and Mun (pp. 102-3). Mun in his posthumously published 'England's Treasure by Forraign Trade' exhaustively analysed and opposed Malynes's theories on exchanges (chaps. xii-xiv.)

In March 1624 Mun declined to serve as deputy-governor of the East India Company, but remained a member of the committee till his death (cf. 'Court Minute-books of the Company' in Cal. State Papers, Colonial). In 1628 the company, embarrassed by the encroachments of the Dutch on their trade, invoked the protection of the House of Commons, and for 'The Petition and Remonstrance of the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading to the East Indies,' Mun, 'the ablest of the early advocates of the East India Company,' was mainly responsible. Many of its sentences and arguments he afterwards introduced verbatim into his 'England's Treasure.' The petition was reprinted in 1641, and was then addressed to both houses of parliament.

Mun's second book, his 'England's Treasure by Forraign Trade, or the Ballance of our Forraign Trade is the Rule of our Treasure,' was probably written about 1630, but it was not printed till 1664—some twenty-three years after his death, when it was 'published for the Common good by his son John.' In it Mun more energetically and formally than before defined the doctrine of the balance of trade.' The ordinary means to encrease our wealth and treasure is,' he wrote (p. 11), 'by Forraign Trade, wherein wee must ever observe this rule: to sell more to strangers yearly than we consume of theirs in value.' Interesting reference is made by Mun to the customs revenue in its relation to English trade to India and other countries; and he shows much acquaintance with the operations of the mint, where his grandfather and uncle had been employed. In showing 'how the Revenues and Incomes of Princes may be justly raised,' he describes (pp. 157-9) the position of monarchs' who have no just cause to lay extraordinary and heavy taxes upon their Subjects'—an apparent reference to the illegal exactions of Charles I. At pp. 165-6 he maintains that 'when more treasure must be