Part 2 — CHAPTER IV. Concerning the infallible teaching of the Roman Pontiff: (continued 85)

COMMERCE: MODERN: The Flemings and the Dutch.

In the first half of the 16th century, the people of the Netherlands were the tolerably contented subjects of that famous monarch, the Emperor Charles V., who ruled in Spain, in Naples, in Germany (the old Empire), and in Burgundy, as well as in the Lowland principalities, Flanders, Holland, and the rest. They were already very prosperous, working hard at many callings, trading shrewdly and busily with the rest of the world, and diligently picking up all kinds of knowledge everywhere. In the southern provinces (which we may call the Belgian, because they are mostly now embraced in the modern kingdom of Belgium) the chief industries were those of the loom, in all branches of weaving; and in skilful workmanship of every kind the people were tasteful and apt. These provinces were the seat of a much greater and more general activity in manufactures than appeared in the states to the north of them (which we will call the Dutch states, without distinction, because they are now included in the kingdom of Holland). The latter were more extensively employed in fisheries, in navigation and in ship building, although most kinds of industry, manufacturing and agricultural, were thriftily and successfully carried on. At the time when Charles V. ruled the Netherlands, the city of Antwerp, in the Belgian circle of provinces, was the great metropolis of Netherland trade. It was much more than that. It was the foremost commercial capital of the world. The traffic which slipped away from Venice and Genoa, had fixed its central seat in this younger town on the Scheldt. It was sure to plant its new emporium somewhere in the Netherlands, because there was nowhere else in Europe so much energy, so much enterprise, so much industry, so much commercial wisdom, so much activity of domestic trade. Spain and Portugal held the wealth of the Indies and the Americas in their hands, but we have seen how incapable they were of using the commercial advantage it gave them. Lisbon, Cadiz and Seville were only depots for the transfer of merchandise; it was impossible to make them real capitals of trade, because they could not and would not furnish either the spirit, or the genius, or the organized agencies that it demands. The Netherlands, with their long schooling in commerce upon a smaller scale, were ready to meet every requirement when the new era opened and gave them their greater chance. There was no other mercantile organization so well prepared. The league of the Hansa Towns was breaking and failing; the English were just beginning to show their aptitude for manufactures and trade. Some one of the Netherland cities was sure to win the sovereignty in commercial affairs which Venice gave up, and Antwerp proved the winner, for a time. During most of the 16th century, it was the business center of Europe. It was the gathering-place of the merchants and the seat of the money-changers and bankers. Two and three thousand ships were often crowded in its harbor, at one time. It distributed the merchandise of the East and West Indies, which it took from Portugal and Spain, and the manifold wares of the many manufacturing towns of Flanders, Brabant, southern Germany, to a great extent, and northern France. {3716} At the same time, its own looms, anvils, tanneries, glass-works, dyeing-vats and mechanic shops of various kinds were numerous and busy. Its thriving population was rapidly increased, for it welcomed all who came with skill or knowledge or money or strong hands to take part in its work. Such was Antwerp during the reign of Charles V., and at the time (A. D. 1555-1556) when that weary monarch gave up his many crowns to his evil son, Philip II. of Spain, and went away to a Spanish monastery to seek for rest. The government of Charles in the Netherlands had been hard and heavy, but the people were left free enough to prosper and to grow intelligent and strong. Under Philip the prospect changed. The story of his malignant persecutions and oppressions, of the revolt to which they drove the Netherland provinces, of the long, merciless war in which he strove to ruin or subdue them, of the independence which the Dutch provinces achieved and the prosperous career on which they entered, is told in another place.

See NETHERLANDS (page 2256, and after).

Antwerp, the great capital of trade, stood foremost in the struggle, as became its greatness, and it suffered correspondingly. The death-blow to its fortunes was given in 1585, when, after a siege that is almost unexampled, it was taken by the Spaniards under Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma, and given up to pillage and slaughter. Its surviving inhabitants fled in large numbers, the greater part of them to Holland, some to England, and some to other countries. Commerce abandoned the port. The chief merchants who had made it the center of their undertakings chose Amsterdam for their future seat of business, and that city rose at once to the commercial rank of which Antwerp had been stripped by the stupid malice of its Spanish sovereign. While the Belgian Netherlands fell hopelessly under the fatal despotism of Spain, the Dutch Netherlands fought their way slowly to independence, which Spain was forced to acknowledge in 1648. But long before that time the Dutch Republic had become a power in Europe—much greater in every way than Spain. Its foundations had been laid by the union of the seven provinces of Holland, Zealand, Friesland, Utrecht, Groningen, Overyssel and Gelderland. It had grown firmer and stronger year by year, and the people, after a time, had not only found themselves able to thrive generally in the midst of their desperate war with Spain, but the war itself opened their way to wealth and power. They learned, early, as we have seen, that they could attack their enemy to the best advantage at sea. In pursuing this ocean warfare they were led on to the East and West Indies, and soon broke, in both regions, the exclusive power which the Spanish and Portuguese had held. When Portugal was dragged into a fatal union with Spain, under Philip II., it had to suffer the consequences of Philip's wars, and it bore more than its share of the suffering. The Dutch and the English forced their way pretty nearly together into the eastern seas, and, between them, the Portuguese were mostly driven out. They divided the rich commerce of that great Asiatic and Oceanic region, and, for a time, the most lucrative part of it was gained by the Dutch. While the English got their footing on the coasts of Hindostan and were laying the foundations of their future empire in India, the Dutch gained control of the spice-growing islands, which, in that day, were the richer commercial prize. The first Dutch fleet that rounded the Cape of Good Hope and made its way into East Indian waters, sailed under the command of one Cornelius Houtmann, who had been in the service of the Portuguese and learned the route. He started in 1595 with four ships and returned, after a voyage of eighteen months, with only two. He had lost more than half his men, and he brought back very little cargo to pay for the adventurous undertaking. But the Dutch were well satisfied with the experiment; they knew that more experience would lead to better success. Another fleet of eight ships was sent out in 1598 and when four of them returned the next year with a precious cargo of spices and other merchandise from Java, which they had procured very cheaply in exchange for the cloths, the metal wares and the trinkets that they took out, the delight of the nation can hardly be described. Part of the fleet had remained in the East to hold and strengthen the position they had gained, and other ships were sent speedily to join them. Very soon the armed merchantmen of the Dutch were thickly swarming in that part of the world, ready for fight or for trade, as the case might be. So many companies of merchants became engaged in the business that too lively competition between them occurred and they threatened to ruin one another. But that danger was overcome in 1602 by joining the rival interests together in one strong association, to which the government gave exclusive rights of trade in the East. Thus the Dutch East India Company was formed, in which the merchants of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Delft and other cities of the republic put their capital together. By its charter, this great company held powers of war as well as of commerce and it used them both with prodigious energy. At first, the chief trading stations of the Dutch in the East were at Bantam, in Java, and Amboyna, one of the group of the Moluccas or Spice Islands; but the city of Batavia, which they founded in Java in 1619, became afterwards their principal seat of trade and the capital of their surrounding possessions. The chief aim of the Dutch was to gather into their hands the profitable commerce of the island world of the Eastern Archipelago, but they did not fail to pursue their Spanish and Portuguese enemies in other quarters, where the chances of traffic looked inviting. They seized positions on the Guinea coast of western Africa and took their full share of the trade with its savage natives, who gave gold dust, ivory, ebony, gums, wax, ginger, pepper, palm oil, various choice kinds of wood, and slaves (for the West Indies and America, when the plantations there began to want labor), in exchange for trinkets and cheap goods. They also occupied and colonized the Cape of Good Hope, which the Portuguese had neglected, and made it, in time, a very prosperous and valuable possession. That they should carry their war with Spain into the West Indies and to the American coasts, was a matter of course. In 1623 a Dutch West India Company was chartered, to organize these operations in the western world, as the East India Company had organized undertakings in the East. {3717} But the West India Company was much less commercial and much more warlike in its aims than the corporation of the orient. Its first object was to take spoils from the enemy, and it found the prizes of war so rich that not much else was thought of. On the North American continent, a most important lodgment was made, as early as 1614, at the mouth of the Hudson River, where the colony of New Netherland was founded. In this quarter, as everywhere, the Dutch and English were rivals, and before many years they came to open war. In the series of wars which followed (1652, 1665, 1672), and in the long contest with Louis XIV. of France which they shared with England, the Dutch expended more of their energies than they could afford. The English, with their well protected island, rich in soil and in minerals, had heavy advantages on their side, when once they had acquired the knowledge of commerce and the ability in labor which enabled them to compete with the Dutch. To the latter nature had always been wholly unfriendly. They had fought against circumstances at every step in their history, and had won their wealth, their knowledge, their high importance and influence in the world, by sheer hard work, tireless patience and indomitable will. But the natural advantages against which they struggled were sure to overcome them in the end. It must be said, too, that they did not grow in character as their fortunes rose. It is not difficult, therefore, to account for the fact that the Dutch nation slowly slipped back, during the 18th century, from the high and leading position in civilization to which it had climbed, and lost by degrees its commercial supremacy, while the English nation came to the front.

COMMERCE: MODERN: The English: 16-17th Centuries. Commercial progress. The East India Company.

As English commerce slowly freed itself from foreign hands, it fell under the control of monopolies at home. The merchants of the Middle Ages, in England and elsewhere, had formed themselves into societies, or guilds, just as the artisans and mechanics in different trades had done. Such associations had originally grown out of the disorderly state of the times, when government and law were weak, and when men who had common interests were forced to unite to protect themselves, and to establish customs and rules for regulating their business affairs. But the guilds almost always became, in time, oppressive monopolies, each acquiring, in its own department of business, such exclusive rights and privileges as practically shut out from that business all persons not admitted to its membership. This occurred among the merchants, as it did elsewhere, and English commerce grew up under the control of various societies of "Merchant Adventurers," as they were called.

See MERCHANT ADVENTURERS (page 2153).

The disputes and contests of these companies, at home and abroad, and their suppression of individual enterprise, appear to have hindered the growth of English commerce for a long period. But it did grow steadily, notwithstanding, and through the reigns of Henry VIII. and Elizabeth, the number of English ships set afloat and of English merchants trading abroad, was rapidly multiplied. Meantime the English people gained skill in weaving, dyeing and other arts, and were fast extending the manufacture at home of their own famous Wool. This, in turn, made the sheep farming more profitable, and so much land was taken for that purpose that other products were diminished and most articles of food rose in price. That occurrence caused grave anxiety, and the meddling statesmen of the time, who thought that nothing could go well if their wisdom did not regulate it by law (as too many meddling statesmen think yet) began to frame acts of Parliament which directed how farming lands should be managed and how many sheep a single farmer should be permitted to own. The same kind of statesmanship took alarm at the spread of weaving, in a small way, among industrious villagers and country people, who set up looms and made and sold cloth, outside of the guilds of the town weavers. So the complaints of the latter were listened to, and Parliament forbade weaving to be done outside of certain towns, except for home use in the family of the weaver. There was much of that sort of legislation during Tudor times, and the industry and enterprise of the country had to struggle long and hard for freedom to fairly exercise themselves. But in spite of meddling statesmen and tyrannical monopolies, the people went all from year to year, learning more, doing more, producing more, wanting more, buying and selling more, and living in a better way. After about 1511, there appears to have been a considerable direct trade growing up between England and the countries of the eastern Mediterranean (the Levant), and consuls, to look after the rights and interests of English merchants, began to be appointed, at Candia, and elsewhere, as early as 1530. The voyage from London to the Levant and return then occupied from eleven months to a year. About 1535 the English made their appearance as traders on the Guinea coast of West Africa, disputing the exclusive rights which the Portuguese claimed there, and in 1537 they opened trade with the Moors of the Barbary coast, in northern Africa. In 1553 a chartered company of London merchants was formed with the object of exploring for a northeastern passage to China, around Europe, through the Arctic seas, as a means of dividing the trade of the East with the Portuguese, who controlled the southern route, around Africa. This is believed to have been the first joint stock corporation of shareholders that was organized in England. Sebastian Cabot, then "Grand Pilot of England," was at the head of it. The northwestern passage was not found, but the company opened a trade with Russia which proved to be exceedingly valuable. Accepting this, in lieu of the China trade which it could not reach, it became, as the Russia Company, a rich and powerful corporation. The success of the Russia Company stimulated the adventurous disposition of the English people and set other enterprises in motion. But still more energy was roused by the hostility of national feeling toward Spain. The destruction of the Armada broke the Spanish naval power and made the English bold. They began to navigate the sea from that time with intent to become its masters, though the Dutch were still superior to them in maritime strength and experience. During the reign of Elizabeth there rose a new race of Vikings, very much like the old Norse heroes of the sea, and pursuing a very similar career. {3718} The most daring and most famous among them, such as Grenville, Drake and Hawkins, were more than half pirates, and their voyages were chiefly expeditions for plunder, directed against the Spaniards and Portuguese. The trade which they first gave attention to was the trade in negro slaves. But those piratical adventurers of the 16th century made England the "mistress of the seas." They trained for her a body of sailors who were able in time to more than cope with the Dutch, and they opened the newly known regions of the world for her merchants and colonists to spread over them. Before the end of the 17th century, the English had become the foremost power in the western world and were making the most of its opportunities for production and trade. Meantime they were pushing their way with equal energy in the East. On the last day of the year 1600 the "Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies," which became afterwards so great and famous as the "East India Company" of England, was chartered by the Queen. The Company sent out its first fleet of five vessels in 1601. The expedition returned, after an absence of two years and seven months, richly laden, in part with pepper from Sumatra and in part with the spoils of a Portuguese ship which it had captured in the straits of Malacca. It had settled a trading agency, or factory, at Bantam—and that was the beginning of the vast empire which England now rules in the East.

See INDIA: A. D. 1600-1702 (page 1709).

COMMERCE: MODERN: The English: 17-18th Centuries. The Colonial or Sole Market Commercial System.

"The doctrine that the commercial prosperity of a country depends on the creation, maintenance, and extension of a sole market for its products and for its supplies, was prevalent from the discovery of the New World and the Cape Passage down to the war of American Independence. This was the principal object of Borgia's Bulls. This was what animated the Dutch, in their successful, in the end too successful, struggle, after a monopoly of the Spice islands. This was the motive which led to the charters of the Russian Company, the Levant Company, the East India Company, the Turkey Company, the Hudson's Bay Company, in England. The theory was organized in the colonial system, which Adam Smith examined, attacked, and as far as argument could go, demolished in his great work. But the dream of a sole market is still possessing the Germans and the French. … The early wars of Europe were wars of conquest. … After them came the wars of religion, from the outbreak of the Insurrection in the Low Countries, and the civil wars in France, down to the Peace of Westphalia in the middle of the 17th century. From that day to our own, European wars have been waged on behalf of the balance of power, the principal mischief-maker in the contest being France. The English, the French, and the Dutch were the competitors in the wars for a sole market. But Holland was practically ruined at the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, and France was stripped … of her colonies at the peace of Paris, and England became not only the principal maritime, but the principal manufacturing and mercantile country in the world. As regards English trade, however, though India was an outlet to some extent for English goods, its trade was in the hands of a chartered company, whom the Seven Years' War had left in serious straits. The most important sole market which Great Britain had acquired by her wars was the seaboard of North America. To support the finances of the chartered company, the British Parliament determined on taxing the inhabitants of her sole market, and the result as you know was the war of American Independence. … The colonial or sole-market system was based on a strict reciprocity. The English Government admitted colonial produce into the English markets at differential duties, or prohibited the produce of foreign nations and foreign colonies altogether. The Colonies were not only the customers of English manufacturers only, to the absolute exclusion of foreign manufactures, but were prohibited from undertaking those manufactures themselves. The English Government adopted with their colonies the policy which they adopted with Irish manufactures, which they also prohibited, but with this difference, that they disabled the Irish from having any trade whatever with England, with the Colonies, and with foreign countries. They wished to extinguish, with one exception, every Irish product, and to constitute themselves the sole manufacturers and shopkeepers for the Irish. They allowed only the linen manufacture of Ulster. The Irish were to be, with this exception, agriculturists only, but they were to be disabled from selling their agricultural produce in England, or elsewhere. They were practically denied the right of trade. … It was the doctrine of the sole market in its most exaggerated form. … The colonial system, under which advantages were secured to the colonial producer by giving him a preferred market in Great Britain, while the colonist was debarred from engaging in manufactures, was a selfish one on the part of the English merchants and manufacturers. It gave the colonist a sole market, it is true. But it does not follow that a sole market is a high market. On the contrary, it is probable that the offer of a sole market is intended to secure a low market. The Virginian planter sent the whole of his tobacco to England. The English trader re-exported it to other countries, say Holland or Germany. It may be presumed that he made a profit on the original consignment, and on the re-exportation, or he would not have undertaken the business. … The colonial system did not preclude the plantations from sending, under the strict conditions of the Navigation Act, certain kinds of produce to other countries than England. These were called non-enumerated commodities, the principal being corn, timber, salted provisions, fish, sugar, and rum. There was a reason for this, which was to be found in the fiscal system of England. We did not want colonial corn, for there were duties on corn, levied in the interest of the landlords, nor colonial timber, salted meat and salted fish, for the home produce of these articles were similarly assisted. Sugar and rum were allowed to be exported, for the owners of the plantations in the Leeward isles were chiefly absentee English proprietors, who had already a monopoly of English supply, and were powerful enough in Parliament to get an extended market elsewhere. But in 1769, just before the troubles broke out with the American plantations, an Act was passed, disabling the colonists from sending even the non-enumerated commodities to any country north of Cape Finisterre, in Northern Spain. … The enumerated goods, and there was a long list of them, could be exported to Great Britain only. They consisted, as Adam Smith says, of what could not be produced in this country, and what could be produced in great quantity in the Colonies."

J. E. T. Rogers, The Economic Interpretation of History, lecture 15.

{3719}

COMMERCE: MODERN: The Americans: Colonial Trade.

"We are a nation of land-traffickers, but our ancestors in the colonies traded and traveled almost entirely by water. There were but twelve miles of land-carriage in all the province of New York; beyond Albany the Indian trade was carried on by 'three-' or 'four-handed batteaus,' sharp at both ends, like the Adirondack boat of to-day. Yachts, with bottoms of black oak and sides of red cedar, brought wheat in bulk and peltries down the Hudson; other craft carried on the domestic trade of New York town with the shores of Long Island, Staten Island, and the little ports beyond the Kill von Kull. … The first regular wagon-carriage from the Connecticut River to Boston did not begin until 1697; Massachusetts had then been settled seventy years. The flat-bottomed boat, which has since played so important a part in the trade of the Ohio and the Mississippi, and whose form was probably suggested by that of the 'west country barges' of England, appears to have been used for floating produce down the Delaware before 1685. In the Chesapeake colonies, until late in the provincial period, there were almost no roads but the numerous bays and water-courses, and almost no vehicles but canoes, row-boats, pinnaces and barks. Places of resort for worship or business were usually near the waterside. … But of all means of travel or trade the Indian canoe was the chief. … Roads in the colonies were hardly ever laid out, but were left where Indian trail or chance cart-track in the woods had marked them. … From England, along with bad roads, the colonists brought the pack-horse which, in Devon and Cornwall, at the close of the last century, still did the carrying, even of building-stones and cord-wood. Most of the inland traffic of the colonial period was done by packing. … The Germans, whose ancestors had four-wheeled vehicles in the days of Julius Cæsar, made good roads wherever they planted themselves. While their English neighbors were content to travel on horseback and to ford and swim streams, the Salzburgers in Georgia began by opening a wagon-road twelve miles long, with seven bridges, 'which surprised the English mightily.' Pennsylvania, the home of the Germans, alone of the colonies built good straight roads; and the facility which these afforded to ten thousand freight-wagons was the main advantage that gave Philadelphia the final preeminence among the colonial sea-ports, and made Lancaster the only considerable inland mart In North America. … Proximity to the wampum-making savages at one end of Hudson River navigation and to the beaver-catchers at the other made New York the chief seat of the fur trade. Wagon-roads, soil, climate, and an industrious people made Philadelphia the principal center of the traffic in bread and meat. The never-ending line of convenient shore that bordered the peninsulas of Maryland and Virginia, and gave a good landing-place at every man's door, with a tobacco currency, rendered it difficult to build towns or develop trade among the easy-going planters of the Chesapeake and Albemarle regions. A different coast-line, and rivers less convenient, made Charleston the rich and urbane commercial and social center of southern Carolina. Until about 1750 Boston was the leading sea-port, and its long wharf, 2,000 feet in length with warehouses on one side of it, was the New World wonder of travelers. Five or six hundred vessels annually cleared out of Boston in the middle of the 18th century for the foreign trade alone, and the city contained between twenty and thirty thousand people at the outbreak of the Revolution. But Newport, with its thirty distilleries to make rum of the molasses brought from the islands, and its seventeen sperm-oil and candle factories to work up the results of the whaling industry, had nearly half as many ships in foreign trade as Boston, and three or four hundred craft of all sorts in the coast-wise carrying trade. He was thought a bold prophet who said then that 'New York might one day equal Newport'; for about 1750 New York sent forth fewer ships than Newport, and not half so many as Boston. … But Philadelphia—planted late in the 17th century—outstripped all rivals, and for the last twenty years of the colonial period was the chief port of North America. … The imports and exports of the two tobacco colonies together were far larger than those of Philadelphia, but their profits were far less."

E. Eggleston, Commerce in the Colonies (Century, June, 1884).

COMMERCE: MODERN: The English: 18-19th Centuries. Rising prosperity and commercial supremacy. Successful War, Free Trade and Steam Power.

"If we look at the state of the European powers after the conclusion of the Seven Years' War in 1763, we shall see how favourable our position then was. In the first place, England had seriously crippled her commercial rival, France, both in her Indian and American possessions, and thereby had gained extensive colonial territories which afforded a ready market for British goods. Spain, which had been allied with France, had lost at the same time her position as the commercial rival of England in trade with the New World. Germany had for some time ceased to be a formidable competitor, and was now being ravaged by internal conflicts between the reigning houses of Austria and Prussia. Holland, which had once been England's most serious rival—especially in foreign commerce—was at this time in a similar condition, and had greatly declined from the prosperity of the 16th and 17th centuries. Hence England alone had the chance of 'the universal empire of the sole market.' The supply of this market was in the hands of English manufacturers and English workmen, so that the great inventions which came into operation after 1763 were thus at once called into active employment, and our mills and mines were able to produce wealth as fast as they could work, without fear of foreign competition. It is not surprising, therefore, to find that in the ten years, from 1782 to 1792, our entire foreign trade was nearly doubled, the exact figures being: 1782, imports £10,341,628, exports £13,009,458; 1792, Imports £19,659,358, exports £24,905,200. And this remarkable progress was still kept up even during the great continental wars which were caused by the French Revolution, and which lasted for almost a quarter of a century. … {3720} In spite of the almost entire loss of our trade in some directions, English commerce improved in others; and, in fact, any loss was more than counterbalanced by an increase in regard to the (now independent) United States, Russia, Venice, Germany, and Northern Europe, as well as with the West and East Indian colonies, both British and foreign. In fact, many of the countries whom France had compelled to become our enemies found themselves unable to do without British manufactures, especially as their own industries were suffering from the warfare that was going on on the Continent, and therefore had to find means to procure our goods. … The close of the 25 years of continental war (1815) is sometimes taken as being the date when the modern system of commerce may be said to have had its beginning. Up to that time, although great changes and advances had been made, the spirit of monopoly and the general restrictive policy which characterised previous centuries, were still, to some extent, in force. But not very long after the peace that was won by the battle of Waterloo, a remarkable change was made in the commercial policy of England. … We now come to the beginnings of freedom of trade."

H. de B. Gibbins, British Commerce and Colonies, pages 91-102.

"When the wars of the French Revolution began, the foundations of a great empire had already been broadly laid; and when it ended, England stood out as a power which had grown greater in the struggle. … Dutchman, Dane, and Spaniard, Frenchman and Venetian, all ancient competitors of England, fell before her; and, when the sword was sheathed in 1815, it was no exaggerated boast to call her mistress of the seas. These facts should never be lost sight of in any consideration of the causes which have led us to where we now are. Without these preparatory steps, both in domestic industries and in foreign wars and conquests, England would not, with all her material advantages, have been so entirely the gainer by the progress of the last fifty years as she has so far proved to be. … There is the more need to remember this because the time immediately following the war was one of severe domestic suffering, and of much retrograde legislation, conceived with a view to, if possible, lessen that suffering. … The worst of all the laws which then restricted trade were those relating to the exports and imports of corn, which the younger men of to-day have well-nigh forgotten. … It was not till after long years of agitation by John Bright, Richard Cobden, and other leaders of the Anti-Corn Law League, that the landed party gave way sullenly, and assented, amid the most gloomy predictions of impending ruin, to the repeal of the sliding scale altogether, and the virtual abolition of all corn laws by the substitution of a fixed duty of 1 s. per quarter. Thus recently was one of the most oppressive pieces of fiscal legislation that man could have conceived withdrawn; and not until 1849, when that law came into force, could the industries of the country be said to be anything like unfettered. Yet twenty years more passed before this shilling duty—the last rag of protection—was itself flung aside, and the import of corn became perfectly free. … But many other changes had in the meantime taken place, all tending more and more to throw off the shackles of trade. … As late as 1840 our customs tariff was described in the report of a committee of the House of Commons as 'presenting neither congruity nor unity of purpose;' as 'often aiming at incompatible ends,' seeking both to produce revenue and to protect interests in ways incompatible with each other. There were no fewer than 1,150 different rates of duty chargeable on imported articles, … and the committee gave a list of 862 of such articles which were subject to duty, seventeen of which then produced 94 per cent. of a revenue amounting to £23,000,000. … The present customs tariff contains less than two dozen articles all told, and including those on which duty is imposed to countervail the excise charges on internal products. The ordinary import articles on which duty is charged number only seven. … But there is yet another hindrance the removal of which has to be noticed, and which, till removed, cramped England very seriously, viz. the navigation laws and the great trade monopoly of the East India Company. … It took longer time … to accomplish the complete deliverance of our mercantile marine from the baneful influence of 'protective' jealousy than to accomplish any other great free-trade reform. A tentative effort to lessen the consequences of confining the carrying trade of England to English ships was made in 1825 by Mr. Huskisson; but it was not till 1854 that complete free trade on the sea was granted by the abolition of any restriction as to the nationality of vessels engaged in the coasting trade of the kingdom. … Here, then, we have noted briefly the various steps and leading characteristics of the commercial reforms which, in this country, either paved the way for or secured the benefit of the great outburst of enterprise and influx of wealth which began in the second quarter of the present century. These various reforms constitute, so to say, the negative side of the modern commercial prosperity which this country built upon the foundations of her world-wide empire; and, in order to get a complete outline of the position which we at present occupy, we must now revert briefly to the positive side of the subject; we must find out where the great modern wealth has come from, and on what it has been based. Freedom of trade no doubt did much to call wealth and enterprise into being; but in what did this wealth consist? Happily the leading features are not difficult to trace. Although the foundations of the great manufacturing industries of this country lie far back in the past, their development, like the growth of free-trade principles, is quite modern, and dates in reality from the day when George Stephenson won the competition at Liverpool with his locomotive 'the Rocket,' settling thereby the question of railroad travelling by steam beyond dispute. The mere stimulus to all kinds of mining and manufacturing industries which this victory and the subsequent railway operations gave, was itself enough to cause the trade of this country to press forward by 'leaps and bounds.' Since November 1830, it may be said to have done so; and the mere fact that England was the originator of the railway systems of the world, and that she contained within herself almost boundless materials wherewith to supply those systems, would itself suffice to explain the pre-eminence which from that day to this has been unquestionably hers. {3721} The great natural resources of the country were first employed in supplying the materials for home development, and then gradually the wealth thus acquired by digging in the bowels of the earth was utilised in tempting or leading other nations into a career of 'progress' similar to our own. In spite of the many losses which individuals suffered in the early days of this progress, the nation grew steadily richer and its stores of realised wealth increased with every new enterprise almost that it took up. … Each year the realised wealth of the one before told, as it were, in swelling the working power of the nation, and in enlarging the business capacities and scope of its credit. … Side by side with the increased produce of the country, the increased manufactures, and the increasing wealth, there were growing up facilities for intercommunication with all parts of the world, and with that an increasing tendency to emigration. The home hives were constantly throwing off young swarms, which, settling now in America, now in Australia, now in Africa, became so many new centres of demand, so many links in the trade chain that we had bound round the world."

A. J. Wilson, British Trade (Fraser's Magazine, September, 1876), pages 271-277.

"The almost unlimited expansion which becomes marked about 1850 and culminates in 1873, has been pointed to by many different people as proof of the great effect of different measures or inventions; as a matter of fact, it was due to no one cause, but was rather the result of multitudinous discoveries and events, acting and reacting on each other. Perhaps the following list of dates shows this most clearly;—

Opening of first English railway, 1830; Wheatstone's telegraph, 1837; first ocean steamer, 1838; settlement in New Zealand, 1840; reduction of duties on raw materials, 1842; repeal of Corn Laws, 1846; commercial treaty with France, 1860.

Here are seven events of widely different natures, each of which must have had its effect in the period under consideration, and it would be useless, even if it were possible, to weigh the separate result of each. We cannot estimate, we can obtain no criterion of the vast effects of the adoption of Free Trade. Three things, however, are clear;— First, that till the suffocating restrictions were removed, trade could not expand; when exports were prohibited, imports could not be plentiful; when imports were taxed, the demand at enhanced prices could not be great. Secondly, if every restriction was removed from every branch of trade, there would be no increase without natural causes of manufacture and demand, no increased demand without a cheapening or improvement of supply; that, in fact, Free Trade is the method, not the source, of commerce, and that the claim of this increase as the direct result of freedom and a proof of its expediency is an inaccurate exaggeration. Thirdly, that the date of the marked commencement of the expansion coincides exactly with the reductions and abolitions of duties, pointing to the fact, borne out by all concurrent events, that the adoption of Free Trade was the opening of the valve which allowed the forces of commerce full play. … It was in the trades of comparatively recent establishment, in England especially, that there were immense outputs (of cotton goods and machinery, for instance), in great excess of the home demand; and this could only pay if the foreign demand grew in proportion to the growing efficiency; that is to say, our newer industries became the most important, and were marked as our division of international labour. The foreign demand, indeed, for our manufactures and our machines was extraordinary. Now, every country is trying to rival our goods, and each to produce for herself the manufactures she requires; then, rivalry was out of the question. … On every side new markets were opened; old trades were increased, new developed. The railways built with our materials opened up districts hitherto inaccessible; this acted as a fresh stimulus to our manufacturers—more capital was forthcoming, and more railways were built. Not only were countries, with which we had already established some trade, brought nearer and in closer relation, but new countries were discovered. Australia and New Zealand were ready to take our surplus population, and were not behindhand in the new system of development. Our older colonies also increased. With each emigration the number of our customers abroad was multiplied. In 1850 and 1852 this process was accelerated by the news of the gold discoveries in California and Australia. So great was the emigration and the consequent demand for ships that all freights were increased, and, with a short lull, this continued till 1856. … The last great impetus was given by the Suez Canal, by which the journey to India and the East was quickened by one-half, and, at the same time, rendered more secure."

A. L. Bowley, England's Foreign Trade in the Nineteenth Century. chapter 4.

See, also, TARIFF LEGISLATION (pages 3073-3077).

COMMERCE: MODERN: The Americans: A. D. 1856-1895. Decay of American shipping interests.

"Down to the year 1856, the United States had rapidly advanced in commercial greatness, and had overcome all the obstacles which had clustered about their path. At that time we were close upon the heels of England, and everything pointed to our speedily passing her in the race for commercial supremacy. Since then our commerce has steadily declined,—a misfortune usually attributed to the civil war, and subsequently to the competition of more profitable forms of investment. These circumstances no doubt hastened the loss of our commerce; but, as Lieutenant Kelley points out, they are not the true causes of its decline, inasmuch as that began before the civil war. The origin of our difficulties lay in the abandonment of our old policy, which, from the beginning of the century, consisted in surpassing all the world in the quality and speed of our ships and in our naval architecture. With the substitution of iron for wood we began to drop behind, until, with a population of 55,000,000, we have a tonnage but little greater than we had when half as numerous. Moreover, our percentage of wrecks is larger than that of any other seafaring people, and our ships and steamers are shorter-lived.

The Question of Ships (Atlantic Monthly, June, 1884, pages 859-861).

{3722}

"The first symptoms of the decadence appeared in 1856, in the falling-off in the sales of American tonnage to foreigners; the reduction being from 65,000 in 1855 to 42,000 in 1856, to 26,000 in 1858, and to 17,000 in 1860. During the war, however, the transfers of American tonnage to foreign flags again increased very largely, and, for the years 1862 to 1865 inclusive, amounted to the large aggregate of 824,652 tons, or to more than one-fourth of all the registered tonnage (the tonnage engaged in foreign trade) of the United States in 1860. But these transfers, it is well understood, were not in the nature of ordinary business, but for the sake of obtaining a more complete immunity from destruction upon the high seas than the United States at that time was able to afford. The year 1856 also marks the time when the growth of our foreign steam-shipping was arrested, and a retrograde movement inaugurated; so that … our aggregate tonnage in this department was 1,000 tons less in 1862 than it was in 1855. The total tonnage of every description built in the United States also declined from 583,450 tons in 1855 (the largest amount ever built in any one year) to 469,393 in 1856, 378,804 in 1857, and 212,892 in 1860, a reduction of 68 per cent in five years. During the year 1855, American vessels carried 75.6 per cent of the value of the exports and imports of the United States. After 1855 this proportion steadily declined to 75.2 per cent in 1856, 70.5 in 1857, 66.9 in 1859, and 65.2 in 1861, the year of the outbreak of the war. … Of the enormous increase in the foreign commerce of the United States since 1860, as above noted, every maritime nation of any note, with the exception of the United States, has taken a share. American tonnage alone exhibits a decrease. Thus, comparing 1880 with 1856, the foreign tonnage entering the seaports of the United States increased nearly 11,000,000 of tons; whereas the American tonnage entered during the same period exhibits a decrease of over 65,000 tons. British tonnage increased its proportion from 935,000 tons in 1856 to 7,903,000 in 1880; Germany, during the same time, from 166,000 to 1,089,000; and Sweden and Norway from 20,662 to 1,234,000. Austria, limited to almost a single seaport, jumped up from 1,477 tons in 1856 to 206,000 tons in 1880, and had, in 1879, 179 large-class sailing-vessels engaged in the American trade. Sleepy Portugal increased during the same period from 4,727 tons to 24,449 tons. … How is it, that the United States, formerly a maritime power of the first class, has now no ships or steamers that can profitably compete for the carrying of even its own exports; not merely with the ships of our great commercial rival, England, but also with those of Italy, Sweden, Norway, Germany, Holland, Austria, and Portugal? … The facts already presented fully demonstrate that the war was not the cause, and did not mark the commencement, of the decadence of American shipping; although the contrary is often and perhaps generally assumed by those who have undertaken to discuss this subject. The war simply hastened a decay which had already commenced. … The primary cause was what may be termed a natural one, the result of the progress of the age and a higher degree of civilization; namely, the substitution of steam in place of wind as an agent for ship-propulsion, and the substitution of iron in the place of wood as a material for ship-construction. … The means and appliances for the construction of iron vessels did not then [in 1855] exist in the United States; while Great Britain, commencing even as far back as 1837 (when John Laird constructed his first iron steamers of any magnitude for steam navigation), and with eighteen years of experience, had become thoroughly equipped in 1855 for the prosecution of this great industry. The facilities for the construction of steam machinery adapted to the most economical propulsion of ocean vessels, furthermore, were also inferior in the United States to those existing in Great Britain; and, by reason of statute provisions, citizens of the United States interested in ocean commerce were absolutely prevented and forbidden from availing themselves of the results of British skill and superiority in the construction of vessels when such a recourse was the only policy which could have enabled them at the time to hold their position in the ocean carrying trade in competition with their foreign rivals. … The inability of the ships of the United States to do the work which trade and commerce required that they should do as well and cheaply as the ships of other nations having been demonstrated by experience, the decadence of American shipping commenced and was inevitable from the very hour when this fact was first recognized, which was about the year 1856. Here, then, we have the primary cause of the decay of the business of ship-building in the United States and of our commercial marine. … The question which next naturally presents itself in the order of this inquiry and discussion is, Why is it that the people of the United States have not been permitted to enjoy the privileges accorded to other maritime nations, of adjusting their shipping interests to the spirit and wants of the age? Why have they alone been debarred from using the best tools in an important department of commerce, when the using meant business retained, labor employed, and capital rewarded, and the non-using equally meant decay, paralysis, and impoverishment? The answer is, Because of our so-called navigation laws."

D. A. Wells, Our Merchant Marine, chapters 2-3.

"Somewhat curtailed, the navigation laws may be summarized as follows: No American is allowed to import a foreign-built vessel in the sense of purchasing, acquiring a registry, or using her as his property; the only other imports, equally and forcibly prohibited, being counterfeit money and obscene goods. An American vessel ceases to be such if owned in the smallest degree by a naturalized citizen, who may, after acquiring the purchase, reside for more than one year in his native country, or for more than two years in any other foreign state. An American ship owned in part or in full by an American citizen who, without the expectation of relinquishing his citizenship, resides in any foreign country except as United States Consul, or as agent or partner in an exclusively American mercantile house, loses its register and its right to protection. A citizen obtaining a register for an American vessel must make oath that no foreigner is directly or indirectly interested in the profits thereof, whether as commander, officer, or owner. Foreign capital may build our railroads, work our mines, insure our property, and buy our bonds, but a single dollar invested in American ships so taints as to render it unworthy of the benefit of our laws. No foreign-built vessel can, under penalty of confiscation, enter our ports and then sail to another domestic port with any new cargo, or with any part of an original cargo, which has once been unladen previously, without touching at some port of some foreign country. {3723} This law is construed to include all direct traffic between the Atlantic and Pacific ports of the United States via Cape Horn, the Cape of Good Hope, or the Isthmus of Panama; and being a coasting trade, foreigners cannot compete. An American vessel once sold or transferred to a foreigner, can never again become American property, even if the transaction has been the result of capture and condemnation by a foreign power in time of war. Vessels under 30 tons cannot be used to import anything at any seaboard town. Cargoes from the eastward of the Cape of Good Hope are subject to a duty of 10 per cent. in addition to the direct importation duties. American vessels repaired in foreign ports must pay a duty on the repairs equal to one-half the cost of the foreign work or material, or pay 50 per cent. ad valorem, the master or owner making entry of such repairs as imports. This liberal provision, which dates from 1866, is made to include boats obtained at sea, from a passing foreign vessel, in order to assure the safety of our own seamen. … All other nations have the power of buying ships for foreign trade in the cheapest market, and the effort to protect our shipbuilders by the denial of this right forbids the return of commercial prosperity."

J. D. J. Kelley, The Question of Ships, chapters 4-5.

COMMERCE: MODERN: The recent revolution in Commerce.

"All economists who have specially studied this matter are substantially agreed that, within the period named [1860-1885], man in general has attained to such a greater control over the forces of Nature, and has so compassed their use, that he has been able to do far more work in a given time, produce far more product, measured by quantity in ratio to a given amount of labor, and reduce the effort necessary to insure a comfortable subsistence in a far greater measure than it was possible for him to accomplish 20 or 30 years anterior to the time of the present writing (1889). In the absence of sufficiently complete data, it is not easy, and perhaps not possible, to estimate accurately, and specifically state the average saving in time and labor in the world's work of production and distribution that has been thus achieved. In a few departments of industrial effort the saving in both of these factors has certainly amounted to 70 or 80 per cent; in not a few to more than 50 per cent. … Out of such results as are definitely known and accepted have come tremendous industrial and social disturbances, the extent and effect of which—and more especially of the disturbances which have culminated, as it were, in later years—it is not easy to appreciate without the presentation and consideration of certain typical and specific examples. … Let us go back, in the first instance, to the year 1869, when an event occurred which was probably productive of more immediate and serious economic changes—industrial, commercial, and financial—than any other event of this century, a period of extensive war excepted. That was the opening of the Suez Canal. … The old transportation had been performed by ships, mainly sailing-vessels, fitted to go round the Cape, and as such ships were not adapted to the Suez Canal, an amount of tonnage, estimated by some authorities as high as two million tons, and representing an immense amount of wealth, was virtually destroyed. The voyage, in place of occupying from six to eight months, has been so greatly reduced that steamers adapted to the canal now make the voyage from London to Calcutta, or vice versa, in less than 30 days. The notable destruction or great impairment in the value of ships consequent upon the construction of the canal did not, furthermore, terminate with its immediate opening and use; for improvements in marine engines, diminishing the consumption of coal, and so enabling vessels to be not only sailed at less cost, but to carry also more cargo, were, in consequence of demand for quick and cheap service so rapidly effected, that the numerous and expensive steamer constructions of 1870-1873, being unable to compete with the constructions of the next two years, were nearly all displaced in 1875-1876, and sold for half, or less than half, of their original cost. And within another decade these same improved steamers of 1875-1876 have, in turn, been discarded and sold at small prices. … Again, with telegraphic communication between India and China, and the markets of the Western world, permitting the dealers and consumers of the latter to adjust to a nicety their supplies of commodities to varying demands, and with the reduction of the time of the voyage to 30 days or less, there was no longer any necessity of laying up great stores of Eastern commodities in Europe; and with the termination of this necessity, the India warehouse and distribution system of England, with all the labor and all the capital and banking incident to it, substantially passed away. Europe, and to some extent the United States, ceased to go to England for its supplies. … Importations of East Indian produce are also no longer confined in England and other countries to a special class of merchants; and so generally has this former large and special department of trade been broken up and dispersed, that extensive retail grocers in the larger cities of Europe and the United States are now reported as drawing their supplies direct from native dealers in both China and India. … In short, the construction of the Suez Canal completely revolutionized one of the greatest departments of the world's commerce and business; absolutely destroying an immense amount of what had previously been wealth, and displacing or changing the employment of millions of capital and thousands of men. … The deductions from the most recent tonnage statistics of Great Britain come properly next in order for consideration. During the ten years from 1870 to 1880, inclusive, the British mercantile marine increased its movement, in the matter of foreign entries and clearances alone, to the extent of 22,000,000 tons; or, to put it more simply, the British mercantile marine exclusively engaged in foreign trade did so much more work within the period named; and yet the number of men who were employed in effecting this great movement had decreased in 1880, as compared with 1870, to the extent of about 3,000 (2,990 exactly). What did it? The introduction of steam hoisting-machines and grain-elevators upon the wharves and docks, and the employment of steam-power upon the vessels for steering, raising the sails and anchors, pumping, and discharging the cargo; or, in other words, the ability, through the increased use of steam and improved machinery, to carry larger cargoes in a shorter time, with no increase—or, rather, an actual decrease—of the number of men employed in sailing or managing the vessels. … {3724} Prior to about the year 1875 ocean-steamships had not been formidable as freight-carriers. The marine engine was too heavy, occupied too much space, consumed too much coal. … The result of the construction and use of compound engines in economizing coal has been illustrated by Sir Lyon Playfair, by the statement that 'a small cake of coal, which would pass through a ring the size of a shilling, when burned in the compound engine of a modern steamboat would drive a ton of food and its proportion of the ship two miles on its way from a foreign port.' … Is it, therefore, to be wondered at, that the sailing-vessel is fast disappearing from the ocean? … Great, however, as has been the revolution in respect to economy and efficiency in the carrying-trade upon the ocean, the revolution in the carrying-trade upon land during the same period has been even greater and more remarkable. Taking the American railroads in general as representative of the railroad system of the world, the average charge for moving one ton of freight per mile has been reduced from about 2.5 cents in 1869 to 1.06 in 1887; or, taking the results on one of the standard roads of the United States the (New York Central), from 1.95 in 1869 to 0.68 in 1885. … One marked effect of the present railroad and steamship system of transportation has been to compel a uniformity of prices for all commodities that are essential to life. … For grain henceforth, therefore, the railroad and the steamship have decided that there shall be but one market—the world."

D. A. Wells, Recent Economic Changes, pages. 27-47.

A recent English writer says: "Formerly we [the English] were the great manufacturers of the world; the great distributors and the great warehousemen of the world. Our country was the point on which the great passenger traffic impinged from America and from our Colonies, and from which passengers distributed themselves over the continent of Europe. The products of the world as a general rule came to English ports, and from English ports were distributed to their various markets. All this has much changed. Probably the alteration is more marked in our distributing trade than in that of our manufacturing trade or in any other direction. About twenty years ago all the silk that was manufactured or consumed in Europe was brought to England from the East, mostly in a raw state, and was thence distributed to continental mills. Notwithstanding the increased consumption in Europe, silk now coming to England for distribution is only about one-eighth of the quantity that came here some twelve years ago. This is one single example of an Oriental product. The same diversion of our distributing trade can be traced in almost every other commodity. Many people believe that the opening of the Suez Canal has caused this diminution of our distributing trade, and it cannot be denied that the Suez Canal has done much to divert Oriental trade from this country, and to send goods direct through the Canal to the continental ports, where they are consumed, or where they can be placed on railways and be forwarded without break of bulk to their destinations. But whatever the Suez Canal may have done to divert trade in Oriental goods such as tea or silk, it cannot account for the diversion of the trade coming from America. Yet we find the same diversion of American products which formerly came to England for distribution. With cotton the same result is found, and with coffee from the Brazil. Nor does the diversion of these articles merely demonstrate that our distributing trade is being lost to us: it also shows that the manufacturers of England now permit the raw material of their industries to be sent straight to the factories of their competitors on the Continent. It shows that the great manufactures of the world are being transferred from England to Belgium, France, Germany, and even to Portugal and Spain. In the train of these manufactures are rapidly following all the complex and complicated businesses which are the hand-maidens of commerce. For instance, the financial business which used to centre in London is being transferred to Paris, Antwerp, and Germany, mainly because the goods to which this business relates are now consigned to continental countries instead of as formerly being brought to England to be distributed therefrom. … The loss of our distributing trade is to my mind in a great measure due to the fact that goods consigned to continental ports can be there put upon railways and sent straight to their destination; while goods sent to English ports must be put upon a railway, taken to our coast, there taken out of the railway, put on board a vessel, taken across to the Continent, there unloaded, then put on the railway and sent off to their ultimate destination. These transhipments from railway to vessel and from vessel to railway are always costly, always involve time, and in the case of some perishable articles render the transaction almost prohibitive. To get over this difficulty and to retain our distributing trade, there appears to me to be only one course open, and that is in some way to obtain direct railway-communication from Liverpool, from London, from Bristol, from Hull, from Glasgow, and from Dundee, to the continental markets where the goods landed at those ports are consumed."

H. M. Hozier, England's Real Peril (Macmillan's Magazine, July, 1888).

COMMERCE: MODERN: Waterways and Railways in modern inland commerce.

"There are three great epochs in the modern history of canal navigation, each marked by characteristics peculiar to itself, and sufficiently unlike those of either of the others to enable it to be readily differentiated. They may be thus described:

1. The era of waterways, designed at once to facilitate the transport of heavy traffic from inland centres to the seaboard, and to supersede the then existing systems of locomotion—the wagon and the pack-horse. This era commenced with the construction of the Bridgewater Canal between 1766 and 1770, and terminated with the installation of the railway system in 1830.

2. The era of interoceanic canals, which was inaugurated by the completion of the Suez Canal in 1869, and is still in progress.

3. The era of ship-canals intended to afford to cities and towns remote from the sea, all the advantages of a seaboard, and especially that of removing and dispatching merchandise without the necessity of breaking bulk.

{3725}

The second great stage in the development of canal transport is of comparatively recent origin. It may, in fact, be said to date only from the time when the construction of a canal across the Isthmus of Suez was proved to be not only practicable as an engineering project, but likewise highly successful as a commercial enterprise. Not that this was by any means the first canal of its kind. On the contrary, … the ancients had many schemes of a similar kind in view across the same isthmus. The canal of Languedoc, constructed in the reign of Louis XIV., was for that day as considerable an undertaking. It was designed for the purpose of affording a safe and speedy means of communication between the Mediterranean and the Atlantic Ocean; it has a total length of 148 miles, is in its highest part 600 ft. above the level of the sea, and has in all 114 locks and sluices. In Russia, canals had been constructed in the time of Peter the Great, for the purpose of affording a means of communication between the different inland seas that are characteristic of that country. The junction of the North and Caspian Seas, of the Baltic and the Caspian, and the union of the Black and the Caspian Seas, had all been assisted by the construction of a series of canals which were perhaps without parallel for their completeness a century ago. In Prussia a vast system of inland navigation had been completed during the last century, whereby Hamburg was connected with Dantzic, and the products of the country could be exported either by the Black Sea or by the Baltic. In Scotland the Forth and Clyde Canal, and the Caledonian Canal, were notable examples of artificial navigation designed to connect two seas, or two firths that had all the characteristics of independent oceans; and the Erie Canal, in the United States, completed a chain of communication between inland seas of much the same order. But, although a great deal had been done in the direction of facilitating navigation between different waters by getting rid of the 'hyphen' by which they were separated anterior to the date of the Suez Canal, this grand enterprise undoubtedly marked a notable advance in the progress of the world from this point of view. The work was at once more original and more gigantic than any that had preceded it. … The Suez Canal once completed and successful, other ship canal schemes came 'thick as autumnal leaves in Vallombrosa.' Several of these were eminently practical, as well as practicable. The Hellenic Parliament determined on cutting through the tongue of land which is situated between the Gulfs of Athens and Lepantus, known as the Isthmus of Corinth. This isthmus divides the Adriatic and the Archipelago, and compels all vessels passing from the one sea to the other to round Cape Matapan, thus materially lengthening the voyages of vessels bound from the western parts of Europe to the Levant, Asia Minor and Smyrna. The canal is now an accomplished fact. Another proposal was that of cutting a canal from Bordeaux to Marseilles, across the South of France, a distance of some 120 miles, whereby these two great ports would be brought 1,678 miles nearer to each other, and a further reduction, estimated at 800 miles, effected in the distance between England and India. The Panama Canal (projected in 1871, and actually commenced in 1880) is, however, the greatest enterprise of all, and in many respects the most gigantic and difficult undertaking of which there is any record. The proposed national canal from sea to sea, proposed by Mr. Samuel Lloyd and others for Great Britain, the proposed Sheffield Ship Canal, the proposed Irish Sea and Birkenhead Ship Canal, and the proposed ship canal to connect the Forth and the Clyde, are but a few of many notable examples of the restlessness of our times in this direction. … There are not a few people who regard the canal system almost as they might regard the Dodo and the Megatherium. It is to them an effete relic of a time when civilisation was as yet but imperfectly developed. … Canals do, indeed, belong to the past. … That canals also belong to the present, Egypt, the American isthmus, Manchester, Corinth, and other places, fully prove, and, unless we greatly err, they are no less the heritage of the future."

J. S. Jeans, Waterways and Water Transport, section 1, chapter 1.

"'The sea girt British Isles have upwards of 2,500 miles of canals, in addition to the Manchester Ship Canal, which is thirty-five and one-half miles, and is said to be one of the most remarkable undertakings of modern times.' … In 1878, Germany had in operation 1,289 miles of canals, and had ordered the construction of 1,045 miles of new canals. Belgium has forty-five canals. Italy, Hungary, Sweden, Holland and Russia have their respective systems of canals. France has expended a larger amount of money than any other European nation, to provide for canal navigation, and in 1887 the total length of its canals was 2,998 miles. About forty-eight per cent of the tonnage of that Republic was transported on its waterways. The average capacity of boats used therefor was 300 tons. The total length of the canals in operation in the United States in 1890 was upwards of 2,926 miles."

H. W. Hill, Speech on Canals in New York Constitutional Convention of 1894.

"In most of the leading countries of the world, a time arrived when the canal system and the railway system came into strong competition, and when it seemed doubtful on which side the victory would lie. This contest was necessarily more marked in England than in any other country. England had not, indeed, been the first in the field with canals, as she had been with railways. … But England having once started on a career of canal development, followed it up with greater energy and on a more comprehensive scale than any other country. For more than half a century canals had had it all their own way. … But the railway system, first put forward as a tentative experiment, and without the slightest knowledge on the part of its promoters of the results that were before long to be realised, was making encroachments, and proving its capabilities. This was a slow process, as the way had to be felt. The first railway Acts did not contemplate the use of locomotives, nor the transport of passenger traffic. The Stockton and Darlington Railway, constructed in 1825, was the first on which locomotives were employed.

See Steam Locomotion (page 3029).

Even at this date, there were many who doubted the expediency of having a railroad instead of a canal, and in the county of Durham … there was a fierce fight, carried on for more than twenty years. In the United States, the supremacy of waterways was maintained until a much later date. … {3726} A keen and embittered struggle was kept up between the canal and the railroad companies until 1857; and even in the latter year the Legislature of the State of New York, finding that railway competition was making serious inroads upon their canal traffic, were considering whether they should not either entirely prohibit the railways from carrying freight, or impose such tolls upon railway tonnage as would cripple the companies in their competition with canals. … The agitation, however, came to nothing. It had no solid bottom. It was an agitation similar in kind to that which had disturbed Europe when Arkwright's spinning machine and Compton's mule were taking the place of hand labour. The clamour suddenly collapsed, and was never heard of afterwards. Meanwhile the railway system proceeded apace. The records of human progress contain no more remarkable chapter than that which tells of the growth of American railroads. … In the annals of transportation, there is no more interesting chapter than that which deals with the contest that has been carried on for nearly half a century between the railways and the lakes and canals for the grain traffic between Chicago and New York. This contest is interesting, not only to Americans, as the people who are engaged in it, and whom it more directly concerns; but also to the people of Europe, and of Great Britain in particular, the cost of whose food supplies is affected thereby. … The circumstances of the Erie Canal are, however, exceptional. Seldom, indeed, do railway freights run so low as they do on the 950 miles of rail way that separate Chicago from New York. Over this distance, the great trunk lines have recently been carrying freight at the rate of 15 cents, or 7½ d. per 100 lbs. This is equivalent to about 14 s. per ton, or exactly 0.174 d. per ton per mile. There is probably no such low rates for railway transport in the world. But this low rate is due entirely to the competition of the lakes, rivers, and canals."

J. S. Jeans, Waterways and Water Transport, chapters 26-27.

"The early railroad engineers overestimated the speed which could be readily attained. Fifty years ago it was generally expected that passenger trains would soon run at rates of from seventy-five to one hundred miles an hour—a prediction which has as yet remained unfulfilled. On the other hand, they underestimated the railroad's capacity for doing work cheaply. It was not supposed that railroads would ever be able to compete with water-routes in the carriage of freight, except where speedy delivery was of the first importance. Nor was it at that time desired that they should do so. The first English railroad charter contained provisions expressly intended to prevent such competition. A generation later, in the State of New York itself, there was a loud popular cry that the New York Central must be prohibited from carrying freight in competition with the Erie Canal. The main field of usefulness of railroads, and the means by which that field was to be developed, were not merely ignored, they were positively shunned. This period of railroad infancy ended about the year 1850. The crisis of 1847 marked its close in England. The Revolution of 1848-51 was the dividing line on the continent of Europe. The land grants of 1850, and the formation of three trunk lines from the seaboard to the interior may be taken as the beginning of the new era in the United States. It began to be seen and felt that a steam railroad was something more than an exaggerated turnpike or horse railroad, and that it had functions and laws of its own. The changes were: first, the consolidation of old roads; second, the construction of new ones in a great variety of conditions; third, and most important, the development of traffic by cheap rates and new methods. … Under all these influences the railroad mileage of the world increased from 20,000 in 1850 to 66,000 in 1860, 137,000 in 1870, 225,000 in 1880, and [406,416 in 1893.—'Archiv für Eisenbahnwesen']. … Rapid as has been the growth of the railroad mileage, traffic has kept pace with it. It is estimated that the total number of tons moved in 1875 was about 800,000,000. At present [1885] it is about 1,200,000,000 annually, while the passenger movement has increased from 1,400,000,000 to 2,400,000,000. If we could take distance as well as quantity into account, the change (for freight at any rate) would be still greater. To a certain extent this increased intensity of use of railroads is due to improvements in engineering; to a much greater extent it is the result of improved business methods. … Between 1850 and 1880 rates were reduced on an average to about one half their former figures, in spite of the advance in price of labor and of many articles of consumption. A variety of means were made to contribute to this result. The inventions of Bessemer and others, by which it became possible to substitute steel rails for iron, made it profitable for the railroads to carry larger loads at a reduction in rates. Improvements in management increased the effective use of the rolling stock, while the consumption of fuel and the cost of handling were diminished. By other changes in railroad economy it became possible to compete for business of every kind, with the best canals or with natural water-courses. The railroad rates of to-day are but a small fraction of the canal charges of two generations ago; while in volume of business, speed, and variety of use there is an inestimable advance."

A. T. Hadley, Railroad Transportation, chapter 1.

"The railway mileage in the United States on June 30, 1893, was 176,461.07 miles. This shows an increase during the year of 4,897.55 miles, being an increase of 2.80 per cent. The previous report showed an increase during the year ending June 30, 1892, of 3,160.78, being an increase of 1.88 per cent over the mileage of the year 1891. The rate of increase from 1886 to 1887 was 9.08 per cent; from 1887 to 1888, 6.05 per cent; from 1888 to 1889, 3.22 per cent; from 18139 to 1890, 4.78 per cent; and from 1890 to 1891, 2.94 per cent. … The total number [of men] in the service of railways in the United States on June 30, 1893, was 873,602, being an increase of 52,187 over the number employed the previous year."

Interstate Commerce Commission, Statistics of Railways, 1883 pages 11 and 31.

—————COMMERCE: End————

COMMON LAW, History of.

See LAW (page 1956).

COMMUNISM.

See SOCIAL MOVEMENTS (page 2932).

COMPURGATION, Disappearance of.

See LAW, CRIMINAL: A. D. 1166 (page 1981).

CONGO STATE, The.

See (in this Supplement) AFRICA.

{3727}

CONNECTICUT, Early provision for education in.

See EDUCATION, MODERN (page 729).

CONNECTICUT BLUE LAWS.

See (in this Supplement) BLUE LAWS.

CONSTANTINOPLE: LIBRARIES.

See LIBRARIES, ANCIENT (page 2006).

Mediæval Commerce.

See (in this Supplement) COMMERCE, MEDIÆVAL.

—————CONSTITUTION OF BELGIUM: Start————

On page 2304 of this work, under NETHERLANDS (BELGIUM): A. D. 1892-1893, there is given some account of the revision of the constitution of the kingdom, in 1893, and the peculiar new features introduced in its provisions, relative to the elective franchise. The following is a translation of the text of the revised constitution:

Title I. Of the Territory and of its Divisions.

Article 1. Belgium is divided into provinces, these provinces are: Antwerp, Brabant, Western Flanders, Eastern Flanders, Hainaut, Liège, Limburg, Luxemburg, Namur. It is the prerogative of law, if there is any reason, to divide the territory into a larger number of provinces. Colonies, possessions beyond the seas or protectorates which Belgium may acquire, are governed by particular laws. The Belgian forces appointed for their defense can only be recruited by voluntary enlistment.

Article 2. The subdivisions of the provinces can be established only by law.

Article 3. The boundaries of the State, of the provinces and of the communes can be changed or rectified only by a law.

Title II. Of the Belgians and their Rights.

Article 4. The title Belgian is acquired, preserved and lost according to the regulations determined by civil law. The present Constitution, and other laws relating to political rights, determine what are, in addition to such title, the conditions necessary for the exercise of these rights.

Article 5. Naturalization is granted by the legislative power. The great naturalization, alone, assimilates the foreigner to the Belgian for the exercise of political rights.

Article 6. There is no distinction of orders in the State. Belgians are equal before the law; they alone are admissible to civil and military offices, with such exceptions as may be established by law in particular cases.

Article 7. Individual liberty is guaranteed. No person can be prosecuted except in the cases provided for by law and in the form which the law prescribes. Except in the case of flagrant misdemeanor, no person can be arrested without the order of a judge, which must be served at the time of the arrest, or, at the latest, within twenty-four hours.

Article 8. No person can be deprived, against his will, of the judge assigned to him by law.

Article 9. No punishment can be established or applied except by provision of law.

Article 10. The domicile is inviolable; no domiciliary visit can be made otherwise than in the cases provided for by law and in the form which it prescribes.

Article 11. No person can be deprived of his property except for public use, in the cases and in the manner established by law, and with prior indemnity.

Article 12. The penalty of confiscation of goods cannot be imposed.

Article 13. Civil death is abolished; it cannot be revived.

Article 14. Religious liberty, public worship, and freedom of expressed opinion in all matters are guaranteed, with a reserve for the repression of offenses committed in the exercise of these liberties.

Article 15. No person can be compelled to join, in any manner whatsoever, in the acts and ceremonies of any worship, nor to observe its days of rest.

Article 16. The State has no right to interfere in the appointment nor in the installation of the ministers of any religion, nor to forbid them to correspond with their superiors and to publish their acts under the ordinary responsibility of publication. Civil marriage shall always precede the nuptial benediction, with the exceptions to be prescribed by law in case of need.

Article 17. Teaching is free; all preventive measures are forbidden; the repression of offenses is regulated only by law. Public instruction given at the expense of the State is also regulated by law.

Article 18. The press is free; censorship can never be re-established; caution-money from writers, editors or printers cannot be required. When the author is known and is a resident of Belgium, the editor, the printer or the distributor cannot be prosecuted.

Article 19. Belgians have the right to meet peaceably and without arms, in conformity with such laws as may regulate the use of their right but without the requirement of a previous authorization. This stipulation does not apply to open air meetings, which remain entirely subject to police regulations.

Article 20. Belgians have the right of association; this right cannot be subject to any preventive measure.

Article 21. It is the right of every person to address to the public authorities petitions signed by one or several. The constituted authorities alone have the right to address petitions in a collective name.

Article 22. The secrecy of correspondence is inviolable. The law determines who are the agents responsible for violation of the secrecy of letters confided to the post.

Article 23. The use of the languages spoken in Belgium is optional; it can be prescribed only by law, and only for acts of public authority and for judicial transactions.

Article 24. No previous authorization is necessary for the undertaking of proceedings against public officials, on account of acts in their administration, except that which is enacted concerning ministers.

Title III. Of Powers.

Article 25. All powers are derived from the nation. They are exercised in the manner prescribed by the Constitution.

{3728}

Article 26. Legislative power is exercised collectively by the King, the Chamber of Representatives and the Senate.

Article 27. The initiative belongs to each one of the three branches of the legislative power. Nevertheless, all laws relating to the revenue or to the expenditures of the State, or to the contingent of the army must be voted first by the Chamber of Representatives.

Article 28. The interpretation of laws by authority belongs only to the legislative power.

Article 29. The executive power, as regulated by the Constitution, belongs to the King.

Article 30. The judicial power is exercised by the courts and tribunals. Decrees and judgments are executed in the name of the King.

Article 31. Interests exclusively communal or provincial, are regulated by the communal or provincial councils, according to the principles established by the Constitution.

Chapter First.—Of The Chambers.

Article 32. Members of both Chambers represent the nation, and not merely the province or the subdivision of province which has elected them.

Article 33. The sittings of the Chambers are public. Nevertheless, each Chamber forms itself into a secret committee on the demand of its president or of ten members. It then decides by absolute majority whether the sitting on the same subject shall be resumed publicly.

Article 34. Each Chamber verifies the powers of its members and decides all contests on the subject that may arise.

Article 35. No person can be at the same time a member of both Chambers.

Article 36. A member of one of the two Chambers who is appointed by the government to any salaried office, except that of minister, and who accepts the same, ceases immediately to sit, and resumes his functions only by virtue of a new election.

Article 37. At every session, each Chamber elects its president and its vice-presidents and forms its bureau.

Article 38. Every resolution is adopted by the absolute majority of the votes, excepting as may be directed by the rules of the Chambers in regard to elections and presentations. In case of an equal division of votes, the proposition brought under deliberation is rejected. Neither of the two Chambers can adopt a resolution unless the majority of its members is present.

Article 39. Votes are given by the voice or by sitting and rising; on "l'ensemble des lois" the vote is always taken by the call of the roll of names. Elections and presentations of candidates are made by ballot.

Article 40. Each Chamber has the right of inquiry [or investigation].

Article 41. A bill can be passed by one of the Chambers only after having been voted article by article.

Article 42. The Chambers have the right to amend and to divide the articles and the amendments proposed.

Article 43. The presenting of petitions in person to the Chambers is forbidden. Each Chamber has the right to refer to ministers the petitions that are addressed to it. Ministers are required to give explanations whenever the Chamber requires them.

Article 44. No member of either Chamber can be prosecuted or called to account for opinions expressed or votes given by him in the performance of his duties.

Article 45. No member of either Chamber can be prosecuted or arrested in affairs of repression, during the session, without the authorization of the Chamber of which he is a member, except the case be "de flagrant delit." No bodily constraint can be exercised against a member of either Chamber during the session, except with the same authorization. The detention or the prosecution of a member of either Chamber is suspended during the whole session if the Chamber so requires.

Article 46. Each Chamber determines by its rules the mode in which it will exercise its powers.

Section I.—Of the Chamber of Representatives.

Article 47. Deputies to the Chamber of Representatives are elected directly under the following conditions: A vote is conferred on citizens who have completed their 25th year, who have resided for at least one year in the same commune, and who are not within one of the cases of exclusion provided for by law. A supplementary vote is conferred on each citizen who fulfills one of the following conditions:

1. To have completed 35 years of age, to be married, or to be a widower having legitimate offspring, and to pay to the State a tax of not less than 5 francs on account of dwelling-houses or buildings occupied, unless exempted by reason of his profession.

2. To have completed the age of 25 years and to be owner: Either of real property, valued at not less than 2,000 francs to be rated on the basis of the "revenu cadastral," or of a "revenu cadastral" proportioned to that value; Or of an inscription in the great book of the public debt, or of a "carnet de rente Belge" at the savings bank of at least 100 francs of "rente." The inscriptions and bank books must have belonged to the incumbent for at least two years and a half. The property of the wife is assigned to the husband; that of children under age, to the father. Two supplementary votes are assigned to citizens fully 25 years of age who are included in one of the following cases: A. To be the holder of a diploma of higher instruction or of a similar certificate of attendance on a complete course of medium instruction of the higher degree, without distinction between public and private establishments. B. To fill or to have filled a public office, to occupy or to have occupied a position, to practise or to have practised a private profession, which implies the supposition that the titulary has at least an average education of the higher degree. The law determines these functions, positions and professions, as well as, in given cases, the time during which they shall have been occupied or practised. No person can accumulate more than three votes.

Article 48. The constitution of the electoral colleges is regulated by law for each province. The vote is obligatory and takes place in the commune with exceptions to be determined by law.

Article 49. The electoral law fixes the number of deputies according to the population; this number cannot exceed the proportion of a deputy for 40,000 inhabitants. It determines also the qualifications of an elector and the mode of the electoral operations.

{3729}

Article 50. To be eligible, it is necessary: 1. To be a Belgian by birth or to have received the "grand naturalization"; 2. To enjoy civil and political rights; 3. To have completed 25 years of age; 4. To reside in Belgium.

No other condition of eligibility can be required.

Article 51. The members of the Chamber of Representatives are elected for four years. Half of them are changed every two years, according to the order of the series determined by the electoral law. In case of dissolution, the Chamber is entirely renewed.

Article 52. Each member of the Chamber of Representatives receives a yearly indemnity of 4,000 francs. He is, besides, entitled to free travel on the State railways and on the "conceded" railways, from his residence to the city where the session is held.

Section II.—Of the Senate.

Article 53. The Senate is composed:

1. Of members elected in proportion to the population of each province, conformably to Article 47; though the law may require that the electors shall be 30 years of age, the provisions of Article 48 are applicable to the election of these senators.

2. Of members elected by the provincial councils, to the number of two from each province having less than 500,000 inhabitants, of three from each province having from 500,000 to 1,000,000 of inhabitants, and of four from each province having more than one million of inhabitants.

Article 54. The number of senators elected directly by the electoral body is equal to half the number of the members of the Chamber of Representatives.

Article 55. Senators are elected for eight years; half of them are changed every four years, according to the order of the series determined by the electoral law. In case of dissolution, the Senate is entirely renewed.

Article 56. To be eligible for election and to remain a senator, it is necessary: 1. To be a Belgian by birth or to have received the "grande naturalization"; 2. To enjoy civil and political rights; 3. To reside in Belgium; 4. To be at least 40 years of age; 5. To pay into the treasury of the State at least 1,200 francs of direct taxes, patents included; Or to be either proprietor or usufructuary of real property situated in Belgium, the cadastral revenue from which is at least 12,000 francs. In the provinces where the number of those eligible does not attain the proportion of one in 5,000 inhabitants, the list is completed by adding the heaviest tax-payers of the province to the extent of that proportion. Citizens whose names are inscribed on the complementary list are eligible only in the province where they reside.

Article 56 bis. Senators elected by the provincial councils are exempted from all conditions of census; they cannot belong to the assembly which elects them, nor can they have been a member of it during the year of the election, nor during the two previous years.

Article 57. Senators receive neither salary nor indemnity.

Article 58. The King's sons, or in their absence the Belgian Princes of the branch of the Royal family called to reign, are by right senators at 18 years of age. They have a deliberative voice only at 25 years of age.

Article 59. Any assembly of the Senate which may be held outside the time of the session of the Chamber of Representatives is null and void.