Britain was
then double the present amount in proportion to the number of
the population. Had the trade of the two countries continued
free, it would have increased with the increase of population
and capital. The legitimate exchange trade has decreased between
England and America for thirty years. What part has the
restrictive system had in producing this result? A few facts may
enable us not only to answer this question, but to anticipate
the consequences of a continuance of the same policy. From the
time of the revolutionary war in America until 1812, the trade
between the two countries regularly increased with the increase
of the population. The average annual consumption of foreign
merchandise in the United States for each inhabitant was,

From 1790 to 1800, 39s. 4d.
" 1800 to 1810, 41s. 8d.

"In 1812 came the second American war, and in 1815 the British
corn law, which was promptly followed by the high American
tariff of 1816. For ten years prior to 1830, the annual average
consumption of merchandize had fallen to 22s. 6d., while the
population of the States was nearly double, and their capital
treble that of the ten years preceding 1810. Soon after 1830
followed the modification of the American tariff, and the
importations based on the great transatlantic loans of that
period. But, notwithstanding the stimulation and extravagance of
the time, the average annual consumption amounted to only 31s.
per head of foreign produce during the ten years prior to 1840.
Abating the importation based on the loans of the last few
years, and the trade of England with the United States has not
increased in amount for the last thirty years, while the
population of England has increased from eighteen to
twenty-seven millions, and that of the States from seven to
seventeen millions.

"Let the reader observe this, that in the Eastern States, in
that of Massachusetts, for instance, in which State Boston is
situated, the people bring a large part of their food from the
Western States, where they obtain it in exchange for their
manufactures. If free trade were allowed, is it possible for any
man to give a reason why the manufacturer and laborer of
Manchester would not be able to do as well as the manufacturer
and laborer of Boston now does, abating the difference of