Page:Economic History of Virginia Vol 2.djvu/487

 This is confirmed by the enumeration given by the author of Nova Britannia of the artificers whose services would be required in Virginia; it is significant to note that the tradesmen just named were omitted, the explanation being that the author was anxious to advance the interests of the Colony, and was, therefore, careful not to present it as a possible rival of the English people in any branch of trade in which they were largely engaged. He wished to make them favorable to Virginia by showing that an increase in its population would cause it to become a larger market for the sale of English manufactured goods, and in that character grow in importance each year. In the broadside issued by the Company in 1611, tanners and shoemakers were among those to whom inducements to emigrate were offered; and these inducements proved effective, for it is known that there were shoemakers and tanners in the Colony in 1616 who followed their trades as well as cultivated the ground. It is evident, however, that the Company was still anxious not to create the impression in England that the settlers would be able to manufacture their own supply of shoes. When a committee was appointed from among its members to report upon the best course to be pursued in the development of the lands assigned to the College in Virginia, they recommended that smiths, carpenters, bricklayers, brickmakers, potters, and husbandmen should be sent over, but made no reference to tanners, curriers, and shoemakers, who, it is true, were not especially needed to carry out the purpose in view. In 1648, Samuel Mathews, in addition to having spinners and weavers among his servants