Part 2

Whether the difference of prices be something or nothing; and whether more has been wanted by the French than 66 millions Tournois (found once for all), to secure for ever, the interest at 5 per cent. on a national loan of 1,500 millions Tournois?

6thly,

Whether the monster of a competition (in point of trade) supposed unconquerable on account of the low prices with which it should be armed, be not as fantastical as that of a balance always favourable?

7thly,

Whether the most justifiable premium for exportation be any thing more than one piece of injustice, become necessary to counterbalance a great many others?

8thly,

Whether it do not result from the ever infallible and merely mechanical restoration of an equilibrium in all the prices, that the taxes are in themselves completely innocent;—whether there be more than one kind of taxation, which increases only by the exact amount of the tax, the whole mass of prices;—whether the effect of taxation be not trebled by all other imposts;—whether the most pernicious of them, (after the poll-tax), be not the tax on luxury;—and whether from the instant that all kinds of taxes, either judiciously or injudiciously contrived, have re-acted on every thing, the burthen of the national debt is not literally null in all countries?

9thly,

Whether, after monopoly, credit be not that effect of wealth which increases most the price of every production, both of agriculture and industry?

10thly,

Whether a certain country, where smuggling has been prohibited under pain of the galleys, be not indebted to smuggling itself for one fifth of the products of her agriculture, which the merchant and trader turn to their advantage with as little scruple, as if they had not petitioned for the detestable law against the smuggler?

11thly,

Whether the absurdity of the general opinion, on the most efficacious means of establishing a profitable competition, in point of trade, be not clearly evinced, by the account of a strange revolution in France—a revolution, as indubitable as the two wars in 1755 and 1779?

12thly,

Whether the impossibility of the two supposed balances, constantly at the disposal of England and France, be not proved, by the very facts adduced in both countries to establish the existence of those two monsters?—Whether that impossibility be not demonstrated by other facts as little equivocal; and whether it be not the interest of England and France to renounce the Idol, and solemnly abjure both its works and its pomps?

13thly,

Whether imports and exports be not a mere sport, as innocent as the game of tennis? A sport, nevertheless, which all Governments might turn to great profit, all Subjects to great advantage, and all States to an increase of power and wealth.

14thly,

Whether the generality of exports from England, at different periods, considered with regard to her foreign correspondence, do not demonstrate a kind of electricity, unthought of hitherto, though not unworthy of amusing the greatest politicians at their leisure moments?

15thly,

Whether the trifling jest of luxury be not equally as innocent as the diversion of exporting and importing; and how much the most fastuous, the most profuse, the most sensual of all monarchs, consumes, above the most avaricious of all his subjects?

16thly,

How much (not counting shillings and pence) England has lost, when her right-arm, as her colonies were called, was lopped off; and how much (not counting shillings and pence) Europe might lose by losing her sovereignty over both the Americas?

17thly,

Whether all that had appeared to the Author, as founded in reason and equity, do not finally prove (in spite of the general conspiracy of all Nations and all Ministers) to be strictly conformable to the most stubborn facts;—and whether it do not result from that mass of facts and reasons, that the Author’s assertion, the most interesting to mankind, (that is, to all Princes and their People) is not of the most irrefragable truth, and a truth the most easily brought within the reach of all the parts interested therein?

I, though merely Editor, shall venture still further;—I shall suppose the result of this combination of facts and reasons to be, that the means hitherto devised as the most proper to alleviate the burdens of the people, were the best devised to oppress them: What matters it to the people, provided they are to be oppressed no longer? What is the time past, but the baseless fabric of a vision?

I shall likewise suppose, that from those facts and reasons it should result also, that never was a decrease in the Prince’s revenue more effectually secured, than by the contrivances devised to increase it: What is it to the Prince, provided it be no longer possible to mistake the true means of enriching him?—Is it not the time to come, that should, above all, engross the attention of a Great Prince?

I shall again suppose, as another result, that it has been a mistaken notion, to imagine that the revenue of the People must be lessened, in order to increase that of the Prince:—What is that to the Prince—what is it to the People—provided both be now convinced, that it is not possible to enrich the one, either really or nominally, without enriching the other in the same manner, and in the same proportion?