But it is unnecessary to further trace the varying fortunes of the East India Company[361] since the Revolution, or the origin of the clamour against their monopoly. Suffice it to state that the charges of delinquency and mismanagement which were brought against the directors and employés induced the House of Commons, re-echoing the feeling out of doors, to send up, in 1692, an address to the Crown requesting the immediate dissolution of the Company, and praying for the incorporation of a new association.
Private traders.
However, it was not until 1698 that the government, being in want of money, resolved to throw the trade of India open to the highest bidder. The existing Company was outbid by another association, whose tender to supply two millions sterling was accepted, and an Act passed embodying it under the name of “The English Company trading to the East Indies,” with exclusive possession of the commerce of the East for ever; subject only to the right of the Old Company to continue to trade for three years longer. But the Old Company, having through its treasurer subscribed for and obtained 315,000l. of the loan, became the largest shareholders in the new and rival body. The greatest confusion of conflicting interests consequently ensued. There was the Old Company, trading with its vessels for three years, and at the expiration of that period to be left in legal possession of all its forts and factories in India, besides whatever privileges it had acquired in the East from the native authorities, while, secondly, there was the New Company in the field, but without any Indian possessions whatever, and opposed by a rival body seeking its destruction, and wielding a controling power over its operations. Thirdly, there were a few subscribers to the late loan, who had declined to join the New Company, but who, by the terms of the original contract with the government, were, nevertheless, entitled to trade each for himself, so long as the two millions remained unpaid; and, lastly, there were such private traders as had cleared out from England previously to the 1st of July, 1698, who had a right, in virtue of a clause in the Act, to carry on their trade till they should think fit to return to England. No fewer than sixty ships were employed by these rival traders; a number far in excess of the requirements of the trade, so that the first effects of the competition were ruinous to all parties concerned.
The 100l. shares of the Old Company fell to 37l.; and their rivals being in no better position tended further to exasperate the two companies, whose animosities divided the whole kingdom into two parties, the Old Company being supported by the Tories, and the New by the Whigs. At the dissolution of Parliament in 1700, each party spent enormous sums to procure the election of their friends, and the nation was in a ferment about the contention between them. At length, in July 1702, a tripartite indenture was executed, wherein Queen Anne, with the Old Company and the New Company jointly concerned, became the contracting parties.[362]
Coalition effected.
Satisfactory estimates were taken of the value of the possessions in India of both companies, and adjusted accordingly. Various minor arrangements were made, and after a period of seven years the new association was inaugurated with the title “The United Company of Merchants of England trading to the East Indies;” and thus, in 1708, that powerful body was restored, or rather recreated, which became ultimately possessors of a considerable portion of the vast continent of India, and rulers over more than a hundred million people.
Their trade, 1741-1748, and continued difficulties
But this united Company was frequently opposed. In 1730 the merchants of Bristol and Liverpool, with other capitalists resident in London, made vigorous efforts to prevent the government from granting a renewal of the Company’s charter, under an impression that its profits were enormous. Such may have been the case in some branches of their trade, or in special years; but it afterwards appeared that, on an average of eight years, ending 1741, the value of British goods and products of all sorts exported by the Company to India and China amounted to only 157,944l. per annum, while the average annual value of imports during the seven years ending 1748 was not more than 188,176l.;[363] so that their profits as merchants could not have been large, unless the percentage of gain was excessive upon the amount of business they transacted. Some of their servants, no doubt, realised immense fortunes, especially when the Company secured possession of large tracts of land. But the Company itself, not many years afterwards, was involved in debt and difficulties; and, so far from being able to pay government the stipulated sum of 400,000l. per annum, the directors were compelled in 1772 to apply to the Treasury for a loan. Indeed, had it not been for the greatly increased consumption of tea in Great Britain, the Company at this period would have ceased to carry on any branch of trade with the East, so that its commercial monopoly would then have happily come to an end.
up to 1773.
Their form of charter.