IT would require more time than I have at present to spare in Writing, and I fear, more than the Lords and Com­mons in Parliament Assembled can now well spare, in deliberately Reading and Consi­dering all that might be said on this Subject, and particularly in Replying to what has been Answered to a Treatise, Intituled, An Essay on the East-India Trade; and the Au­thor thereof, though no Trader, has written [Page 4] on the Point, with so much solid Judgment, that he is well able to defend it, if he thinks any thing considerable that is offered against what he has laid down. My Business at present shall be only to take notice of what seems to carry any weight in the last An­swer to the Essay. In a former, Intituled, An Answer to a late Tract, Intituled, An Essay, &c. the Author ingenuously confesses, in his Address to the Clothiers and Weavers, That he has not strength of Judgment to manage Controversies; which he has in his Answer fully enough proved, tho', I think, he gives but little Proof for the Cause he has undertaken; and almost his whole Book consists of Quotations out of the Essay, and offers of overthrowing the Computa­tions made in the Essay, which he intirely mistakes. So that upon the whole, that Answer has little in it, as they who will take the trouble of sedately Reading and Comparing one with the other will find. The last Answer is more regular, and looks more plausible, but being Examined will not, I think, with submission, appear to carry any great weight, and will be found to contain many Mistakes.

The Author asserts, That it has been said formerly by the Advocates for the East-India Trade, That their Manufactures and Toyes [Page 5] were not spent in England, but Transported to Foreign Markets, and thereby occasioned the Importation of more Bullion than ever was Exported; and that therefore that Trade was no damage to England; but that the Truth is now owned, That half of the said Goods are consumed at Home, which, he sayes, was formerly denyed. But he ought to have given more Proof thereof then only saying so, before he had grounded such an insinua­tion thereon; as if what is said in Defence of the East-India Trade needed to be sup­ported with Falsities. For my part, I be­lieve there has been no other Argument made use of in its behalf, but what was then, and is still true, That the East-India Trade is the means of bringing much more Bullion into England than it carries out; which I shall indeavour to prove. And I must deny what he asserts also in the begin­ning, That the India Manufactured Goods do hinder the Consumption of what are Fabrickt by our own People to that degree, or in that sense, which he suggests. But with the Author I do agree, That the Landed Men are more concerned in this Contest than the Weavers: For if the Pro­posed Prohibition pass it will only inrich a few Master Silk Weavers, and their Factors, and at the same time take away the Means [Page] of Increasing the Stock of the Nation, which alone can raise the Value of the Lands of England. I go on therefore to consider the East-India Trade.

The Author of the Answer, pa 4. finds fault with the Computation of our Exports to India, and the Profit upon the Returns, and offers another Account, which I con­ceive very Erroneous, at least it is far from warranting the Conclusion he draws, That this Trade has exhausted 400000 l. per An­num of our Treasure, pa. 6. which shall be examined presently; in the mean time, I can by no means agree with him, That nothing is the Treasure of a Nation but Gold and Silver. The Treasure of a Na­tion not only consists in Money, but in Mo­neys worth. Silver and Gold serve as the measure of other Commodities, and is va­luable only in proportion to them. Jewels, Lead, Tin, Iron, Silks, Woollen Goods, Shipping, &c. ought to be Valued accord­ing to their worth; that is, what they would yield in Money; and all go to make up the Riches and Stock of a Nation. The Nation that has in it Five Millions of Pounds Sterling Silver, and Ten Millions worth of any Goods or Commodities whatsoever one Year, and the next Year shall have Eight Millions of Money, and but Four Millions [Page 7] worth of Goods, is poorer the last Year than the former, by Three Millions. If it were as the Answerer says, That Goods are not the Riches of a Nation, till by Exportation to Foreign Countries they are converted into Gold and Silver. No more then is Money Riches; for you are not sure you shall purchase with that whatever you have occasion for. There is no other use of Riches but to purchase what serves our Necessity and Delight, or to enable us to preserve our Possessions when they are gotten; and some Goods are more acceptable in some Countries, at some times, than Money, and therefore are as well adapted to answer the aforesaid ends, tho' as the Author sayes, they are not so conve­nient for Trade; and whether they are pe­rishable or not, their Value is according to what they will yield in Money.

I think it does not concern the Truth of the Proposition, That the East-India Trade is Beneficial to the Nation, (though as to the quantum it may) whether the Computa­tion in the Essay be exact or no, nor to exa­mine the Grounds of the Answerers Ac­count; though, by the way, I must note, that the last Answerer, pa. 7. as well as the former, pa 14. quite mistakes, in saying the Essay asserts, That the Nation did increase in Riches from Anno 1656 to Anno 1688, Two [Page] Millions per Annum; and upon that Mi­stake both seem to triumph: But if they had perused the said Treatise more carefully, they would have found, that the Author of the Essay only sayes, That he believes from about Anno 1656 to Anno 1688, this Na­tion has every Year gradually increased in Riches: And that about Anno 1688, the in­crease and addition to the Wealth and general Stock of England, arising from Foreign Trade and Home Manufactures, was at least Two Millions Yearly: Which intimates only that about that time there was such an Increase, and not Yearly from Anno 1656. So that all the Answerer sayes, on that Mistaken Head, falls to the Ground.

I shall therefore leave both the Accounts, because I think the certainty of the Sum does not so much concern the Point in que­stion, as the Proportion; and I will take the Matter both wayes: First, Suppose that One Thousand Pounds be sent out to India ⅛ to ¼ part in Goods, it will be allow'd me on all hands, that the Value of about Four Thousand Pounds, that is, Four for One more or less, shall be Returned in In­dian Silks, &c. If all these should be spent at Home, yet is not the Thousand Pounds lost to England, because the said Commodi­ties serve in the room, either of others that [Page 9] are much dearer made at Home, and must else have been used in their stead, or of o­thers from European Countries, which also come much dearer: So that here is Three Fourth Parts Additional Return, out of which the Shipping, and Provision, and Furniture, and Seamens Wages, and others employed therein, the Customs and Over­plus is a clear Advantage to the Nation. But to this the Answerer, and others, who plead for the Prohibition, say, What Fo­reign Commodities are spent in the Nation, add nothing to its Stock: And at the same time acknowledge, That what is spent at Home of our Manufacture adds nothing nei­ther to the Nations Stock; which is true: Only say they, By wearing your own Manu­facture you employ your own People. But if the Case be, as is owned by all, that we want People for our Work; and not Work for our People, then the bringing in Fo­reign Manufactures at half the Price we can make them here at Home, whilst at the same time we can find Imployment for our People, we by that Means save so much Money. This I take to be very clear. And the only Question is then, What other Im­ployment we have for our People? And the Answerer sayes in pa. 24. and again in pa. 31. that it should have been told: Whereas [Page 10] the Essay, pag. 36, 37. does give sufficient Hints, to which I shall add, That we want Seamen, we want Hands in the West-Indies, we want Husbandmen, we want many more Hands in the Woollen Manufacture that it might be wrought Cheaper, and car­ried on to such a degree as it is capable to be improved; and the Linnen Manufacture which the Answerer thinks may do well here in time will employ more hands; not to mention the Fishery and other things.

That there are many Weavers now that want work, I believe, and so there is of many other Trades: This tedious War falls heavier upon some than others, and when Persons enter into a Trade they must be con­tent to take their Fortune in it. Some thrive most in time of Peace, and some in time of War. But what was it increased the num­ber of Weavers so much? Was it not a good Trade which they had even at the time when East-India Goods came in in greatest plenty, and were sold at half the Price they now are, as the Answerer also owns pag. 33. and did not the Trade visibly fall off last Summer, when there was the greatest Scar­city of East-India Goods that has been known for many Years? The Seamen who have encreased in their numbers this War time, when it is over, may as well Mutiny if [Page] Goods and Passengers are permitted to come and go by Land Carriage, and not by Sea; or that one fourth part of their number in English Ships are by the Act of Navigation allowed to be Foreigners, because they are now become Seamen, and when Peace comes there may not be employment for them all, and some must starve, or turn their Hands to something else, but this complaint I be­lieve would not be countenanced, and it seems as unreasonable now upon the com­plaint and uneasiness of the Weavers to Ruin a great number of People whose live­lihood depends not only on the fetching and vending these India Goods, but in the fur­ther Manufacturing them here at home for their sake and advantage whose present want of Work, is apparently not occasion'd by the late coming in of India Goods, but by the dearness of Silk, the alteration of the Coyn, and Calamities of the War, and the Distress brought upon a great many Fami­lies by it. This as to what East-India Goods are spent at Home.

Then as to the Computation of what East-India Goods are Exported to Foreign Mar­kets, whether it be one half or no is not much material: All Merchants know that a considerable quantity goes abroad, and even to France it self, though they, as we, do not [Page 12] openly permit them to be brought in by any other Nation than their own. In this Case then, if only one quarter part goes abroad, that being the prime cost in India upon the afore­mentioned supposition; the other three fourths remaining to be spent in England is clear gains to the Nation, and the hands that would have been employed to make such things as are supplyed by the East-India Goods, by that means are or might be used in other Work, which turns to the Profit of the Nation.

The Answerer says, pag. 9. That it does not appear that 200000 l. worth per annum of East-India Goods were ever Exported to Spain, or any Country from whence we usually Import Bullion; and thereby seems to insinuate as if it were not the same thing whether we send them to Spain from whence Bullion comes, or to Holland or France from whence it comes more seldom: But surely he understands that our general ballance of Trade and the Profit made by it, is to be made as the general Ballance of a Private Trader. If by the Course of our Trade to Holland, we take more Goods than we send, and so want Money there, we must send the ballance from hence in Specie, or have it remitted thither from Spain or some other parts where we have Effects. So that [Page 13] if upon the general Trade of England to all Parts, we Export a greater value then we Import, the rest comes in in Bullion; and on the contrary, if our Imports exceed our Exports, the ballance must be sent out in Money. So that let our East-India Goods be sent to what place soever, their produce will be answered to us in Money at long run, if our other Trades do not require that Money abroad; for all Goods now in all parts of Europe are sold for Money. And if I send East-India Goods to Holland, I re­ceive Money for them, and may bring it over if I will; but if others upon their Trade for Goods from thence, or the King for pay­ment of the Army, want the Money there, I deliver it to them, and receive it here; and to this purpose serves the Exchange. I think what has been said, clearly removes the Objections pag. 9, 10.

The Answerers, I think, both mistake the Essay as to the Profit made by the East-India Trade, which they seem to take as meant so much Profit to the Company, whereas it is plain it is intended so much advance to the Nation; as in the said Essay, pag. 52. it is expressed, That into that ad­vance comes in the King for his Customs, Owners of Ships, such as got by Victual­ling them, Seamen for Wages, and lastly [Page 14] Factors and Servants both Abroad and at Home. And so distinguishes between the Gain made by the Company, and the in­crease to the Nation. So that all the An­swerers Observations drawn from thence are to no purpose.

The Answerers and Favourers of this Pro­hibition make a great cry, as if the Woollen Manufacture is prejudiced by these Goods; whereas the Woollen Manufacture has great advantage by it on sundry Accounts.

1. A great quantity of Woollen Manu­facture, and our Native Product, is Ex­ported to the East-Indies; and at China, which is a cold Country, they like our Woollen Goods, and the Expence thereof is like greatly to encrease, if we our selves be not the hinderance.

2. It keeps the Workers of Wooll to their own Employment, which they would else in probability leave, and turn to the Silk-Weaving Trade as some have done.

3. The Freedom of Trade here causes Peo­ple to Flock into England, whereby the Ex­pence of our own Product and Manufacture is increased: Our Wooll needs not Fall to nothing as the Answerer says, Page 17. to keep on our Woollen Manufactury, but Wooll may bear a good Price, if the working it up be Cheap as it ought to be, and as every [Page 15] one agrees, and as the Committee of Trade in their answer to the Honourable House of Commons have very well observed, and then there's no fear of loosing our Woollen Manufactury, but I am afraid that will not be the way to have Wooll wrought up cheap to employ the Hands that should do it, in other Manufactures, and it is a sign we want people and not work, since the price of Labour and Servants Wages is no where in Europe so dear as in England.

The Answerer by what he said, pag. 17. about Wooll led me to that head before it came regularly on according to the Answer­ers Order and Method, but this was not de­signed a full, exact, and methodical Discourse for the reasons mentioned at the beginning. However I shall not need to repeat any thing, only shall further add, That when those who are of Opinion with me say, That it is not the Interest of the Landed Gentlemen that Wooll should be dear; the Answerer, as many others have done, mistook, when they suggest, that we do not think it most for the advantage of land for Wooll to be dear, if the expence would continue as great and the Price keep up, but our meaning is that it is not the Interest of Landed Men to raise their Wooll for a Year or two to a High Price, whereby the Expence would be les­sened, [Page 16] because the Consequence would be▪ that then it would fall much lower than before; and therefore all that is intended by not desiring Wooll to be dear is, that it is best to be kept at such a moderate Price as may not discourage the Working it up; and that being Wrought up, it might come so Cheap to Foreign Markets, that others might not under-sell us, and so lessen its future Vent.

The Answerer is mistaken in his Asser­tion, pa. 21. That the generality of Mer­chants will own that they have not got by Trading in Woollen Goods for these Thirty Years past 6 per Cent. per Annum, the Insu­rance of Adventures paid: The contrary whereof many Merchants know; and greater Profit might be made thereby, if our Wooll was Manufactured Cheaper: and the way to have that done, is not to draw off our People from that Imployment to other Manufactures: For, the Poor, if Two Dayes work will maintain them, will not work Three: And our Manufactures are never so well Wrought as in a time of dull Trade, when we pay less for Work­manship, and yet the Poor live as well then as in time of greatest Plenty, if they have but a full stroke of Work. And it is too true what an Advocate for the Weavers in­genuously [Page 17] confessed before the Honourable House of Commons, That in times of Plen­ty (which is when the Price of Work is high) they will spend the more in Drinking, and thereby indeed increase the Kings Revenue, whatever the other ill Consequences of it are.

The Answerer pa. 21. desires to know in what places we can consume more Woollen Goods Abroad; and I must acquaint him that very often in Germany, Holland, Portu­gal, Spain, Italy and Turkey, as well as in the West-Indies, our Woollen Goods are scarce, and therefore sold dear, and much more would vend if they were upon the place, and yet more considerable quantities if we could afford them Cheaper; which might be done by the Method the Author of the Essay proposes, pa. 27. And where­as the Answerer sayes, pa. 21. That the Manufactures of VVooll are increased in Ire­land, Holland, France, Germany, Spain, and Portugal, and our Manufactured Goods become a Drugg beyond Sea. It is more than probable that the taking off our People from the Woollen Manufactury to other Manu­factures, has been in a great measure the occasion of it. I confess I wonder to find the Answerer call it a Project, to work up our Woollen Manufactures Cheap, and to [Page 18] doubt whether that would increase their Expence Abroad, to the lessening of that of other Nations. I wish there had been no more uncertain Projects set on foot in Trade in this Kingdom, and then, I am apt to think, our Trade would have been in a better condition. I think the Project of Ruining immediately a great number of Tradesmen, and others, that depend upon the East-India Trade, and putting the Na­tion to 3 or 400000 l. per Annum certain greater Expence then at present it is at, and running the hazard of losing all, or the greatest part of our East-India Trade, only to imploy People at Home in a Silk Manu­factury that would be with more Profit to the Nation imployed in the Woollen Manu­facture, is by far the more dangerous and doubtful Project. The Instance which the Answerer brings, pa. 23. of a Country Gentleman that hath all Conveniences about his House of his own, and should instead of using them for himself and Family, send his Money to Market to buy, and then send his Products Abroad in hopes of making Mo­ney of them, though he do not know of any Market or Buyer for them, will prove just the contrary of what he intends it for, if it be rightly applyed to our Case; for it is certainly the Country Gentlemans Inte­rest [Page 19] so to do, if he can buy at Market what will serve himself and Family for half the Money for which he can sell his own Pro­ducts; which is plainly our Case: For we never want some Price or other for our Pro­duct and Manufacture. And if we can sell them dearer to others then we can in their room purchase other Necessaries, it is a clear Profit to us.

The Answerer does again, pa. 23, 24. as he often does beg the Question, when he sayes, That we spend Indian Goods at Home that we may save our Woollen Goods to have the more for Exportation. We say that the Indian Goods do very little interfere with our Woollen Manufacture; and by the bringing in of Indian Goods more of our Woollen Manufacture, which goes towards the Purchasing of them, is consumed, then would be at Home in their stead: And the Answerer himself, pa. 25. acknowledges, that the Consumption of our English Cloth was never understood to be much prejudiced by these Goods. And then again he takes up the Mistake of very great Gain made by the East-India Trade, taking it in another sense then the Essay intends; and his Suppo­sitions drawn from thence need not therefore to be considered.

[Page 20] The Answerer, pa. 25. and elsewhere, seems angry, without Reason, that the Dutch are quoted in this Controversie. Tho' they are our Allies, they alone are our chief Competitors in the East-India Trade: And if they never had done any thing to sup­plant us in any part of our Trade, we should have the less Reason to be jealous; but since their and our Interest in Trade is distinct, if not opposite, I think he shows himself no great Friend to England that will not calmly admit the English to argue on that Head; and it is so natural and necessary a Consideration to the English in all Foreign Trade, that I wonder any one should be frightned at the mention of it, as the An­swerer seems to be, pa. 25.

Upon the second Head, pa. 26, 27. the Answerer again mistakes the Essay, when he sayes, Silks and Linnen Manufactured in India are no more the genuine Off-spring of this Kingdom, than our Silks and Linnen Manufactured at Home: For I take that to be a Mistake in any one that writes, when by his Answer he perverts the design and meaning of him he answers. The Essay did not, as it seems plain to me, intend to op­pose English Silks to Indian Silks, as if the latter were more the genuine Off-spring of this Nation than the former, as the An­swerer [Page] seems to take it; but he opposes English Silks and Linnen to English Woollen Manufacture, and thence argues, with great Reason, that the Woollen Manufa­cture ought above, and before all other Ma­nufactures to be encouraged.

How it can ruin young Gentlemen (as the Answerer alledges, pa. 28) to spend Foreign Product that cost them but half the Price, rather than our own, which costs at least double, I own is a Paradox to me; and I think there is nothing of boldness in the attempt, to perswade the whole Na­tion to do the like, whilst our own will find vent Abroad, and our People Imployment enough at Home, as they may certainly do

Pa. 28. and 29. Again he falls to arguing upon his old Mistake, of the Gains of the East-India Trade, being 300 per Cent. and asks why the Author of the Essay does no propose the opening the East-India Trade A Subject he was not upon. I may as well ask, why the Answerer does not in his Dis­course give Arguments to oppose a General Naturalization, if he thinks our People want work.

What the Answerer sayes about the Lin­nen Manufacture, pa. 30. I pass over, be­cause I would not lengthen out this Dis­course; and cannot allow what he sayes [Page] pa. 31. That the original or chief cause or means of Riches must be from the Labour of our People. By which, without doubt, he means the Labour of the Hand; for it is evident, that a People may grow Rich without much of such Labour. It is the Product of the Earth, and the well and ad­vantageous Management of Trade in and to Foreign Parts that is a means and great means of inriching a Nation. I confess if a Nation be well Peopled, imploying the Poor in Manufactures rather than to live in Idleness is an addition to the Riches of a Nation: for what any one, or any number of Persons get more than they spend, adds so much to the Stock and Riches of the Nation: And if 10000 People living in England could get more at the Years end by driving a Trade from Holland to the East-Country and back to Holland, then the same 10000 People could get by Working, or Manufacture, it is more the Interest of the Nation, and a greater increase to its Riches, that these People continue that Foreign Trade (whilst their Gains come over to England, as it must do) then to imploy them in Manufactures. Nay, if they Trade on­ly with Money, and the Dutch (if I may not offend the Answerer with naming them) will find at the winding up their Account, [Page] that the Money they have during this War sent over hither, and Lent the Government, and otherwise, at excessive Interest, will bring a considerable addition to the Riches of their State without the Exporting their Product for it, or the Labour of their People.

What the Answerer argues under the Third Head, I think has not much in it, only the continual cry of sending out Mo­ney to the East-Indies; which is taken no­tice of before; and he, or any other, that will take the pains but to make up an Ac­count in Figures (and not loosely in their Heads by speculation, which causes many Mistakes) will find that 10000 l. sent out in Specie to the East-Indies, and Returned in Goods to the value of 40 or 50000 l. and those Goods Exported, or but one quarter part of them (though much more of them are sent out) and the rest used here at Home in the room of others to be Imported from Abroad, or in the room of others made here in England, whilst our Hands may be other­wise imployed than in the Silk Manufactu­ry, as certainly they may, though our Peo­ple were double. I say, they will find that this is a certain Increase, even to the Money in Specie to the Nation. But it has been asserted in Tracts concerning this matter, [Page 24] and the truth is as has been before-mention­ed, that the Importation of these East-India Silks for wear in England, as well as for Ex­portation, has bettered the Trade of the Silk-Weavers, by lowering the Price of Silk, and whetting their Industry and Inventions, and on many other Accounts. But this, and many Arguments brought on the side of those who are against a Prohibition, the con­trary Party are pleased to take no notice of.

The Answerer commends the frugality of the Dutch, and no doubt it is a commenda­ble thing, but where People grow Rich, they will spend more largely, and it is bet­ter they should do so than to slacken their Industry and Diligence in Trade. When the Dutch come once to enjoy their great Increase in a long Peace, you will find them extravagant in one kind of Expence or a­nother as well as other Nations, but it would swell this beyond my intention to inlarge on this Head, therefore I will only add, that in discoursing of this the Answerer I think would have done well to have told what the Essay desires to know why upon the same, and much stronger Reasons we don't prohibit Wine, Fruit, Spice, &c. but indeed three quarter parts of the Essay and the Rea­sons there set down are left unanswered, and therefore I shall not I hope be blamed in not [Page] Replying particularly to every Passage in the Answer, though I think whatever is ma­terial will have been Considered in what has been said before, and what will be Sub­joyn'd before I end.

The Answerer again Page, 56, 57. again asserts what he should have proved, that we send out 600000 l. per Annum in Bullion, and it has never yet been made out that those Goods bring us back again in Bullion the Vallue of 200000 l. and then Argues upon it; whereas all Traders in the Exportation of India Goods know the Fact to be quite otherwise, and therefore not to swell this too much I shall only add some Articles which the Opposers of this Prohibition offered to the most Honourable House of Lords to prove upon Oath before them, and di­stinguish between what part of them the Weavers Advocates in their Printed An­swer allowed, and what part they Contra­dicted, though the Persons Concerned are yet ready to prove and make out the whole.

1. That near half the Wollen Manu­facture sent to India, is vended at China, Surrat, Fort St. George, and the Bay of Bengal, as well as at Persia, and is used for Covering of Rooms, Tents, Covers for Camels, and abundance of other uses, as well as Gar­ments; [Page] And that the Indians like our Manu­facture so well, that the Vent thereof is Daily increasing, and the Goods proposed to be Prohibited, are in great part the Product of the said Woollen Manufacture.

2. That the Value of One Hundred Thousand Pounds per Annum, in Woollen Manufacture, and other the product of England, has actually been Exported to India.

3. That a great Quantity of Money is sent to Turkey to help off our Woollen Ma­nufacture, as well as to India.

4. That in Holland there are many more Looms going than in England, and notwith­standing they have a Manufacture of their own much nearer to the Indian than we, yet they not only Import these Goods from India themselves, but permit them to be Imported into Holland from all other Parts.

5. That the Weavers in Holland, some Years since, Petitioned the States to make such a Pro­hibition as is Proposed here: But upon a full Hearing of the Matter, it was rejected.

6. That the French have mightily Courted the Trade from India, and Settled the Com­pany Trading thither, with great Advan­tages; and in France these Goods are every where Publickly Sold and Worn: So that either there is no such Edict in France, as is pretended, or it is Dispensed withal, or some New Edict has been since emitted.

[Page] 7. That the Weavers had a good Trade here in England, and increased in their Num­bers, whilst these East-India Goods came over in greatest plenty, and when they were sold at half the Prices they are now at; and there is at present a Duty of 20 per Cent. upon them more than was then.

8. That it is not the Importation of these Goods which decays their Trade, if it be Bad, but the Calamity of the War, Alteration of the Coyn, and Scarcity of Money, which e­qually affects other Trades. For that upon the Alteration of the Coyn, our Weavers Goods fell in their Prizes, and their Work fell off; whilst at the same time East-India Goods be­ing scarce, grew dearer and dearer.

9. That at this present Time, at Norwich they begin to have a brisk Trade, and their Goods are Risen 10 per Cent. lately, and in great Demand, notwithstanding the Com­panies late Sale of Silks, which they Com­plain of.

10. That though Mercers bespeak Goods of the Weavers, the Weavers will not make them, but keep their Men out of Work, that they may Clamour for this Bill.

11. That it is only the Silk-Weavers that are concerned in this Matter, and not the Staple VVoollen-Manufactury, which this Bill will rather lessen and obstruct than pro­mote: [Page] So that the Clamour about the Woollen Manufacture is all out of doors in this Case. For if this Bill pass, many Weavers of Wooll would turn to be Silk-Weavers, as some al­ready have.

12. That the Weavers concerned in this Affair are nothing near so Numerous as is pre­tended: And, That the Linnen-Drapers, and other Trades depending thereon, who would be Hurt by this Prohibition, are as Nu­merous, as those who would receive Benefit by it.

13. That the Indian Wrought Silks are ve­ry much Improved here by a further Manu­facturing; and great Numbers of our Peo­ple Employed therein.

14. That the Poverty and Misery amongst the Weavers is very much misrepresented; and that it is no greater, in proportion, with them, than amongst other sort of poor Trad­ing People.

15. That notwithstanding all, the Master Weavers have in few Years last past got great Estates, and continue to Thrive well.

16. That if East-India Silks are Prohibited, and not those from Holland, France and Italy, and other Parts, We shall only Wear the latter in the room of the former, to the far greater Expence of the Nation.

[Page 29] 17. That if this Bill pass, these Goods will be made and imitated in Holland so like, that it will be impossible (when Sold here) for the Drapers to prove they are not East-India Goods.

18. That great Quantities of these Goods are sold for Exportation to Cadiz, Lisbon, the Canaries, Mader as, and other Foreign Parts, under the Value of 50 l.

19. That if this Bill pass for Prohibiting the Selling and Wearing Persian Silks, it is probable the Persians will Prohibit Our Ma­nufactury, which will not only affect the East-India, but also the Turkey Trade.

20. That a Ship lately in China could not put off our Manufactury without taking their Manufacture: And that if this Bill passes, we shall probably lose the Trade for Saltpetre, as well as the other part of the Trade to India.

I would not alter any thing from these Articles as they were deliver'd to the Lords and offered to be proved, only in the second, after Woollen Manufacture, is added, And other the Product of England, which was by oversight omitted before, but alters not the Case, for that Tin, Lead, and such like is as well a Manufacture of England as Woollen Goods; and you have the Articles, or such part of them as the Friends of the Bill in their Printed Paper deny, Printed in an Italic [Page 30] Letter, to distinguish them from the other Articles, and such part of them as they allow. And I shall only add, That I wish the Lords or Commons would be pleased now or here­after, to give an opportunity to have the whole matter publickly discust before them, and to have such things enquired into as would give the best light to make a Judge­ment thereof, I should not doubt but it would plainly appear, That they are very wrong Notions of Trade that are advanced in favour of this bill. And that the East-India Trade, and particularly this part of it, is of very great advantage to this Kingdom. Nay, if our Silk Weavers should have twice the Work they have usually had, they would encrease soon to twice the Numbers, which would not only as is said before draw them from Imployments more Beneficial to the Nation, but upon any sudden Emergency, as War, &c. their Numbers being encrea­sed, their distress would be also encreased.