Note 256-8 — Chapter III

Many of Frederick the Great's colonists turned out very badly. They were attracted only by the premiums offered, and they became dissolute after they had consumed them. Many of them thought that they were to be of use only by giving children to the state (Meissner, Leben des Herrn v. Brenkenhof, 1782), and that the land donated them was to be cultivated by others at the expense of the state! Dohm mentions villages of colonists which had to a great extent changed hands four times in 20 years. Whether the king would not have better attained his object had he employed the younger sons of Prussian peasants as colonists, quære. (Dohm, Denkwürdigkeiten, IV, 390 ff.) Even Süssmilch says: "A native subject is, in most cases and for most purposes, better than two colonists." (Göttl. Ordnung, I, 14, 275.) Compare the work: Wie dem Bauernstande Freiheit und Eigenthum verschafft werden könne, 1769, 16. Every family of colonists in South and new East Prussia is said to have cost the state 1,500 thalers. (Weber, Lehrbuch der polit. Oekonomie, 1806, II, 172); but according to Büsching (Beiträge z. Regierungsgeschichte Friedrichs,[TN 109] II, 239), only 400 thalers. J. Möser is strongly opposed to the encouragement of immigration by direct appeals to it. (P. Ph., I, 60.) According to Bülau, Staatswirthschaftslehre, 24, only those immigrants are welcome who are attracted to the country by the whole character of its national institutions and circumstances. It is a different matter when, for instance, the government in New South Wales permits the colonists, by the payment of very moderate contributions, to have their workmen, friends and relations come after them from England in ships owned by the government. Between 1832 and 1858, £1,700,000 were paid out for such transportation. (Novara-Reise, III, 53.)