Adam Smith, when commenting in his "Wealth of Nations," on the laws relating to wool, reprobates severely the ill-judged compliance of our government, in yielding to the solicitation of our merchants, and allowing them to sway with iron rule the commerce of the world. "The severity of many of the laws which have been enacted for the security of the revenue, is very justly complained of, as imposing heavy penalties upon actions, which, antecedent to the statutes that declared them to be crimes, had always been understood to be innocent. But the cruelest of our revenue laws, I will venture to affirm, are mild and gentle in comparison to some of those which the clamour of our merchants and manufacturers has extorted from the legislature, for the support of their own absurd and oppressive monopolies. Like the laws of Draco, these laws may be said to be all written in blood." None of the laws, however, were effectual, not even the one passed in the middle of the seventeenth century, by which the offence was rendered capital. In spite of the vigilance of our government, a contraband trade in wool was long carried on between the inhabitants of the French and English coasts, especially those of Sussex, by a class of men called Owlers, from their only venturing abroad in the night, and who were tempted to despise the penalty, with an intrepidity astonishing to the rest of Europe, by the high prices that were sure to be afforded to them in the Gallic market. Again, during the first half of the eighteenth century, large quantities of wool were constantly smuggled from Ireland to France, by which our trading interests were considerably injured, and the plans for suppressing exportation shown to be worse than useless.
(51.) Prosperity of the Dutch Manufacturers.—The woollen manufactures of the Hollanders were first established in 1636, or 1637, by one hundred and forty English families, who went from Norfolk and Suffolk, to settle at Leyden, and Alkmaer. The Dutch manufacture of fine woollen cloths was, however, commenced much earlier, or about 1624, at which time they began to interfere with the English trade in the Netherlands; insomuch that, in the twenty-second year of the reign of James I., a certificate was given to the Parliament of 25,000 cloths having been made that year in Holland. Upon this the House of Commons resolved, 1st, "That the merchant adventurers setting impost upon our cloth, is a grievance, and ought not to be continued; and that all other merchants promiscuously, as well as that company, may transport everywhere northern and western kersies, and new draperies."
2dly. "That other merchants, besides the Merchant Adventurers' Company, may freely trade with dyed and dressed cloths, and all sorts of coloured cloths, into Germany and the Low Countries." Much annoyance appears to have resulted to this island, from the progress which the manufacturers in Holland still continued to make, and some curious speculations were of course formed in the minds of the ingenious. In 1651, a scheme was laid before the English commonwealth, for obtaining from the court of Spain an exclusive right to purchase all the Spanish wool; or, in other words, to ruin the Holland market, by stopping the supplies. The projector observed, "That this proposed preemption would totally dissolve the woollen manufacture of Holland, which, by means of that wool (Spanish), hath of late years mightily increased, to the destruction of the vent of all fine cloths, of English manufacture, in Holland, France, and the east country; and hath drawn from us considerable numbers of weavers, dyers, and cloth workers, now settled at Leyden, and other towns in Holland, by whose help they have very much improved their skill in cloth, and have made in that one province (one year with another) 24,000 or 26,000 cloths yearly. That the Hollanders have of late years bought and exported from Biscay, four-fifth parts at least of all their wools, and have sold there proportionally of their own country stuffs." This was certainly a novel method of accomplishing an end by a sweeping monopoly; but the theory was too fine-spun ever to be reducible to practice.
(52.) Fluctuating State of the Trade between 1635 and 1693.—By the great act of tonnage and poundage, passed in 1660, on the restoration of Charles II., taxes were imposed, among other things, on the exportation of woollen manufactures, and it was not till the reign of William, that the wretched policy of such regulations was discovered, and a law was passed in 1700, by which the duties on woollens were abolished, because in the words of the act (ll & 12 William III. chap. 20), "the wealth and prosperity of the kingdom doth, in a great measure, depend on the improvement of its woollen manufactures, and the profitable trade carried on by the exportation thereof."
In the time of Charles II., an act was passed for the erection of manufactories (Par. I, Sess. I, Cap. 40), by which it is enacted, that no native or stranger is to export wool nor skins with wool upon them, until made into work, or put to the best advantage, under the pain of first value thereof, half to the king, and half to the informer. It is also, in this act, ordered, "that none forestall the mercat of wooll, nor keep up the same to a dearth, under the pain against regrators and forestallers, and that for eschewing the deceit of putting stones, or the like stuffs therein, no wooll be wrapt up in the fleece, under the pain of confiscation, half to the king, and half to the discoverer and pursuer, declaring always that the Exchequer may licence the export of wool and skins, as they shall see cause."
The French refugees, in 1635, brought money and talent into England, and contributed greatly to the erection of manufactories for slight stuffs, and other French fabrics, never before made in England. The former law for burying in woollen not being well observed, it was repealed by an Act of Parliament, in the thirtieth year of that king (cap. 3.), which enacted a register to be kept in every parish, by the incumbent or his substitute, that every thing about the corpse of the deceased was made of sheep's wool, of which an affidavit was to be made by the relation of the deceased, and lodged with the incumbent, under the penalty of £5, a moiety of which went to the poor of the parish; the rest to the informer. But this was a sorry check, as vanity was so predominant among the rich, that they paid the penalty rather than want the pleasure of adorning their departed relatives with lace and linen.
In 1667, France supplanted England in many foreign markets, owing to the care that Colbert at that time took to bring the French woollens to perfection. The English immediately turned their attention to other manufactures, in which, as in that of paper, they quickly excelled, and thus compelled the French to abandon markets, in which they had long remained without a rival.
In 1698, a problem was started concerning the manufactures of the country—whether or not a general linen manufacture would prove beneficial to England? As London at this time abounded with new projects and schemes, all promising as usual a hoard of wealth, the question caused much excitement. It was at last determined that a novelty of this kind would lead to the sowing of a great quantity of flax in England, and the neglect of the woollen manufacture, which would follow, might probably lower the price of land; for, as they said at the time, "it requires about twenty acres of land to breed wool, for setting on work the same number of hands which one acre of flax would employ; and yet, in the end, the woollen manufacture will be found to employ by far the greatest number of hands, and yield the most profit to the public, as well as to the manufacturers."
(53.) Irish Manufactures discouraged.—In the same year (1698), the English house of Peers addressed King William with the view of inducing him to discourage the woollen manufactures of Ireland, which, in spite of many restrictions, still continued to cause much vexation to the monopolizers of England. The address ran thus:—"The growing manufacture of cloth in Ireland, both by the cheapness of all sorts of the necessaries of life,[ [7] and the goodness of materials for making all manner of cloth, doth invite his subjects of England, with their families and servants, to leave their habitation to settle there, to the increase of the woollen manufacture in Ireland, which makes his loyal subjects in this kingdom very apprehensive, that the further growth of it may greatly prejudice the said manufacture here; and praying, that his Majesty would be pleased, in the most public and effectual way that may be, to declare to all his subjects of Ireland, that the growth and increase of the woollen manufacture there, hath long, and will ever be, looked upon with great jealousy by all his subjects of this kingdom." A similar address was presented by the Commons, and this most liberal and enlightened monarch was pleased to answer, "Gentlemen, I will do all that in me lies to discourage the woollen manufacture of Ireland." This was certainly altogether a strange proceeding, especially when viewed in conjunction with the cruel prohibitions of former periods.[ [8] Their foreign trade is said by some to have been much diminished by this coolness; but much of the poignancy and crushing animosity of the request are lost when we consider that encouragement was at the same time given by England to the making of Irish linen, his Majesty being desired in the same address, to forward that manufacture, pursuant to the dictates of an act passed in 1696. Nay, some are of opinion that these measures resulted from the soundest views of the relative situations of the countries, and that the prudent tenor of English enactments was never better exhibited, than in the discouragement of the woollen and encouragement of the linen manufactures of Ireland.
(54.) British Trade in 1699.—In 1699 there were 12,000,000 sheep and lambs in Britain, and the yearly increase was supposed to be about 3,600,000. The value of each sheep, besides the skin, was 7s. 4d. The stock was valued at £4,400,000. The value of the wool yearly shorn, at 3s. 4d. per fleece, came to about £2,000,000. The woollens manufactured in Britain amounted in value to £5,000,000 per annum, while our yearly exports of the same were valued at £2,000,000. Many were at that time afraid of the sinking of the woollen manufacture, because the accounts of the fine draperies exported were larger than usual; but, says an anonymous essayist of the period, "such do not contemplate, that, though the old may be lessened, what is commonly called the new draperies have increased, consisting in bays, serges, and stuffs. So that upon the whole, infinitely more of the material of wool has of late years been wrought up for foreign use, than in former times; and herein our merchants have been only forced to follow the modes and humours of those people with whom they deal, and the course they have pursued has hitherto not been detrimental to the public." * * * "'Twere better, indeed, that the call from abroad were only for the fine draperies, because then we should be in a manner without a rival; no country, but England, and Ireland, having a sward or turf that will rear sheep, producing the wool of which most of our draperies are made. 'Tis true the wool of Spain is fine above all others; but 'tis the wear only of the richer sort, and of Spanish cloths not above nine thousand pieces are sent abroad, one year with another."