Page:Life of William Shelburne (vol 2).djvu/273

Rh They forbid rivalry, and rivalry is of the very essence of the well-being of trade. This seems to be the æra of Protestantism in trade. All Europe appears enlightened, and eager to throw off the vile shackles of oppressive and ignorant monopoly; that unmanly and illiberal principle, which is at once ungenerous and deceitful. A few interested Canadian merchants may complain; for merchants always love monopoly, without taking a moment's time to think whether it is for their interest or not. I avow that monopoly is always unwise; but if there is any nation under heaven which ought to be the first to reject monopoly, it is the English. Situated as we are between the old world and the new, and between southern and northern Europe, all we ought to covet upon earth is free trade and fair equality. With more industry, with more enterprise, with more capital than any trading nation upon earth, it ought to be our constant cry, let every market be open, let us meet our rivals fairly, and we ask no more."

On the question of the Loyalists, Shelburne appealed to his own past conduct, as a proof that he was not likely to have neglected their interests. Lord Sackville, he said, had declared his belief that the recommendation of Congress on their behalf would prove of no avail; but the word "recommendation" was that which Congress had always used to the Provincial Assemblies in all their measures relating to money and men. It was difficult, from the nature of the Constitution of the United States, to procure more than a recommendation. It might also be fairly asked which of the two styles of language was most likely to assist the Loyalists: the style of the Address which declared the confidence of Parliament in the good intentions of the Congress, or of those orators who declared that recommendation to be worth nothing. In reply to the questions, "Why have you given America the freedom of fishing in all your creeks and harbours, and especially on the banks of