An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith (ebook reader with highlighter txt) 📖

those drawbacks. The

progress of the linen manufacture of Great Britain, it is

commonly said, has been a good deal retarded by the drawbacks

upon the re-exportation of German linen to the American colonies.

 

But though the policy of Great Britain, with regard to the trade

of her colonies, has been dictated by the same mercantile spirit

as that of other nations, it has, however, upon the whole, been

less illiberal and oppressive than that of any of them.

 

In every thing except their foreign trade, the liberty of the

English colonists to manage their own affairs their own way, is

complete. It is in every respect equal to that of their

fellow-citizens at home, and is secured in the same manner, by an

assembly of the representatives of the people, who claim the sole

right of imposing taxes for the support of the colony government.

The authority of this assembly overawes the executive power ; and

neither the meanest nor the most obnoxious colonist, as long as

he obeys the law, has any thing to fear from the resentment,

either of the governor, or of any other civil or military officer

in the province. The colony assemblies, though, like the house of

commons in England, they are not always a very equal

representation of the people, yet they approach more nearly to

that character ; and as the executive power either has not the

means to corrupt them, or, on account of the support which it

receives from the mother country, is not under the necessity of

doing so, they are, perhaps, in general more influenced by the

inclinations of their constituents. The councils, which, in the

colony legislatures, correspond to the house of lords in Great

Britain, are not composed of a hereditary nobility. In some of

the colonies, as in three of the governments of New England,

those councils are not appointed by the king, but chosen by the

representatives of the people. In none of the English colonies is

there any hereditary nobility. In all of them, indeed, as in all

other free countries, the descendant of an old colony family is

more respected than an upstart of equal merit and fortune; but he

is only more respected, and he has no privileges by which he can

be troublesome to his neighbours. Before the commencement of the

present disturbances, the colony assemblies had not only the

legislative, but a part of the executive power. In Connecticut

and Rhode Island, they elected the governor. In the other

colonies, they appointed the revenue officers, who collected the

taxes imposed by those respective assemblies, to whom those

officers were immediately responsible. There is more equality,

therefore, among the English colonists than among the inhabitants

of the mother country. Their manners are more re publican; and

their governments, those of three of the provinces of New England

in particular, have hitherto been more republican too.

 

The absolute governments of Spain, Portugal, and France, on the

contrary, take place in their colonies; and the discretionary

powers which such governments commonly delegate to all their

inferior officers are, on account of the great distance,

naturally exercised there with more than ordinary violence. Under

all absolute governments, there is more liberty in the capital

than in any other part of the country. The sovereign himself can

never have either interest or inclination to pervert the order of

justice, or to oppress the great body of the people. In the

capital, his presence overawes, more or less, all his inferior

officers, who, in the remoter provinces, from whence the

complaints of the people are less likely to reach him, can

exercise their tyranny with much more safety. But the European

colonies in America are more remote than the most distant

provinces of the greatest empires which had ever been known

before. The government of the English colonies is, perhaps, the

only one which, since the world began, could give perfect

security to the inhabitants of so very distant a province. The

administration of the French colonies, however, has always been

conducted with much more gentleness and moderation than that of

the Spanish and Portuguese. This superiority of conduct is

suitable both to the character of the French nation, and to what

forms the character of every nation, the nature of their

government, which, though arbitrary and violent in comparison

with that of Great Britain, is legal and free in comparison with

those of Spain and Portugal.

 

It is in the progress of the North American colonies, however,

that the superiority of the English policy chiefly appears. The

progress of the sugar colonies of France has been at least equal,

perhaps superior, to that of the greater part of those of

England; and yet the sugar colonies of England enjoy a free

government, nearly of the same kind with that which takes place

in her colonies of North America. But the sugar colonies of

France are not discouraged, like those of England, from refining

their own sugar; and what is still of greater importance, the

genius of their government naturally introduces a better

management of their negro slaves.

 

In all European colonies, the culture of the sugar-cane is

carried on by negro slaves. The constitution of those who have

been born in the temperate climate of Europe could not, it is

supposed, support the labour of digging the ground under the

burning sun of the West Indies ; and the culture of the

sugar-cane, as it is managed at present, is all hand labour ;

though, in the opinion of many, the drill plough might be

introduced into it with great advantage. But, as the profit and

success of the cultivation which is carried on by means of

cattle, depend very much upon the good management of those cattle

; so the profit and success of that which is carried on by slaves

must depend equally upon the good management of those slaves ;

and in the good management of their slaves the French planters, I

think it is generally allowed, are superior to the English. The

law, so far as it gives some weak protection to the slave against

the violence of his master, is likely to be better executed in a

colony where the government is in a great measure arbitrary, than

in one where it is altogether free. In ever country where the

unfortunate law of slavery is established, the magistrate, when

he protects the slave, intermeddles in some measure in the

management of the private property of the master ; and, in a free

country, where the master is, perhaps, either a member of the

colony assembly, or an elector of such a member, he dares not do

this but with the greatest caution and circumspection. The

respect which he is obliged to pay to the master, renders it more

difficult for him to protect the slave. But in a country where

the government is in a great measure arbitrary, where it is usual

for the magistrate to intermeddle even in the management of the

private property of individuals, and to send them, perhaps, a

lettre de cachet, if they do not manage it according to his

liking, it is much easier for him to give some protection to the

slave; and common humanity naturally disposes him to do so. The

protection of the magistrate renders the slave less contemptible

in the eyes of his master, who is thereby induced to consider him

with more regard, and to treat him with more gentleness. Gentle

usage renders the slave not only more faithful, but more

intelligent, and, therefore, upon a double account, more useful.

He approaches more to the condition of a free servant, and may

possess some degree of integrity and attachment to his master’s

interest ; virtues which frequently belong to free servants, but

which never can belong to a slave, who is treated as slaves

commonly are in countries where the master is perfectly free and

secure.

 

That the condition of a slave is better under an arbitrary than

under a free government, is, I believe, supported by the history

of all ages and nations. In the Roman history, the first time we

read of the magistrate interposing to protect the slave from the

violence of his master, is under the emperors. When Vidius

Pollio, in the presence of Augustus, ordered one of his slaves,

who had committed a slight fault, to be cut into pieces and

thrown into his fish-pond, in order to feed his fishes, the

emperor commanded him, with indignation, to emancipate

immediately, not only that slave, but all the others that

belonged to him. Under the republic no magistrate could have had

authority enough to protect the slave, much less to punish the

master.

 

The stock, it is to be observed, which has improved the sugar

colonies of France, particularly the great colony of St Domingo,

has been raised almost entirely from the gradual improvement and

cultivation of those colonies. It has been almost altogether the

produce of the soil and of the industry of the colonists, or,

what comes to the same thing, the price of that produce,

gradually accumulated by good management, and employed in raising

a still greater produce. But the stock which has improved and

cultivated the sugar colonies of England, has, a great part of

it, been sent out from England, and has by no means been

altogether the produce of the soil and industry of the colonists.

The prosperity of the English sugar colonies has been in a great

measure owing to the great riches of England, of which a part has

overflowed, if one may say so, upon these colonies. But the

prosperity of the sugar colonies of France has been entirely

owing to the good conduct of the colonists, which must therefore

have had some superiority over that of the English; and this

superiority has been remarked in nothing so much as in the good

management of their slaves.

 

Such have been the general outlines of the policy of the

different European nations with regard to their colonies.

 

The policy of Europe, therefore, has very little to boast of,

either in the original establishment, or, so far as concerns

their internal government, in the subsequent prosperity of the

colonies of America.

 

Folly and injustice seem to have been the principles which

presided over and directed the first project of establishing

those colonies; the folly of hunting after gold and silver mines,

and the injustice of coveting the possession of a country whose

harmless natives, far from having ever injured the people of

Europe, had received the first adventurers with every mark of

kindness and hospitality.

 

The adventurers, indeed, who formed some of the latter

establishments, joined to the chimerical project of finding gold

and silver mines, other motives more reasonable and more

laudable; but even these motives do very little honour to the

policy of Europe.

 

The English puritans, restrained at home, fled for freedom to

America, and established there the four governments of New

England. The English catholics, treated with much greater

injustice, established that of Maryland ; the quakers, that of

Pennsylvania. The Portuguese Jews, persecuted by the inquisition,

stript of their fortunes, and banished to Brazil, introduced, by

their example, some sort of order and industry among the

transported felons and strumpets by whom that colony was

originally peopled, and taught them the culture of the

sugar-cane. Upon all these different occasions, it was not the

wisdom and policy, but the disorder and injustice of the European

governments, which peopled and cultivated America.

 

In effectuation some of the most important of these

establishments, the different governments of Europe had as little

merit as in projecting them. The conquest of Mexico was the

project, not of the council of Spain, but of a governor of Cuba ;

and it was effectuated by the spirit of the bold adventurer to

whom it was