Acting on these new views, the legislators of both countries, about the same time, commence encouraging the manufactures in which their respective countries are deficient; and, by means of a system of premiums, bounties, and duties, on the detail of which it is unnecessary to enter, in the course of years, succeed so far, that silk goods come actually to be fabricated in the country where no silk goods were manufactured, as cheaply as where they were exclusively manufactured, and hats to be made, where no hats were made, as cheaply as where hats were exclusively made.Part of the capital and industry which went in the one case to the manufacture of hats, goes to manufacture silk goods, and, in the other case, part of the capital and industry which went to manufacture silk goods, goes to manufacture hats.Both countries produce that at home, which they before imported from abroad, and are therefore saved the expense attending that importation.
Completely to effect this change requires an outlay, in both cases, of £1,000,000.Being effected however, it of course saves each country the expense of transport, which, at 25 per cent on the imported goods, makes an annual saving of its expenditure, and increase therefore of its revenue, of £400,000, so that, in two or three years time, the sum expended is repaid, and each community supplied with a new fund to furnish additional comforts to its members, or to add to their capital.According to our author's tenets, this proceeding of both legislators, although admitted to be practicable, is yet held to be necessarily, and in its very nature, injurious.
Although it can seldom happen, that two countries are so circumstanced that both, according to our supposition, can benefit equally by the effecting of such a change, yet, if one effect such a change, as far as that country is concerned it would seem to be beneficial, on a simple calculation of expense and gain, provided the saving of revenue produced by it, is greater than the expenditure of revenue necessary for producing it.It is this end which the legislator generally aims at reaching by the regulations he imposes on the trade and industry of the society, and which, by these means, he often arrives at.Yet, even when in such cases successful, our author maintains, that his proceedings are necessarily, and essentially prejudicial to the interests of the society.That, even though they may cause a commodity to be produced at home, cheaper than abroad, they must diminish, instead of augmenting, the national revenue and riches.A conclusion so extraordinary, is arrived at by a process of reasoning as extraordinary.
