CONSIDERATIONS Relating to the African BILL.Humbly Submitted to the Honourable Houſe of Commons.

THE Preamble of the Bill aſſerts Four Things:

• Firſt, That the African Trade is beneficial to this Kingdom and the Plantations.
• Secondly, That Forts and Caſtles are neceſſary for ſupport of that Trade.
• Thirdly, That thoſe Forts and Caſtles have hitherto been maintain'd by the preſent African Company.
• Fourthly, That it is moſt reaſonable all the King's Subjects trading to Africa, ſhould contribute towards maintaining thoſe neceſſary Forts and Caſtles.

This Preamble being by the Committee poſtpon'd; the Firſt Clauſe of the Bill comes to be conſider'd. — And by this Clauſe,

Firſt, It is enacted, That the Royal African Company ſhall maintain the Forts and Caſtles they now have, or hereafter ſhall purchaſe or erect for the general Benefit of that Trade. And by the

Second Clauſe, It is farther enacted, That all his Majeſty's Subjects tra­ding to Africa, ſhall pay the Company〈1 span left blank〉per Cent. towards ſupport of that neceſſary Charge, &c.

Object. It hath been objected out of the Houſe (and it's probable in the Committee may be ſaid), That this Clauſe by a ſide-wind doth confirm the Company's Charter, wherein are ſeveral Privileges granted (ſaid to be) againſt Law.

Anſw. With ſubmiſſion, this Clauſe can only confirm the Incorporation-Part of the Charter, which conſtitutes them a Company: And though ſome other parts of that Charter may not be juſtifiable, yet I preſume ſcarce any Lawyer will ſay that the King could not make them a Company. — But a Proviſo at the laſt may ſalve that Objection, if it hath any force: For there­in it may be provided, That nothing in this Bill ſhall be conſtrued to confirm any part of that Charter which is againſt Law; but as to thoſe they ſhall remain as tho' this Act had never been made, &c.

In this firſt Clauſe it will be conſider'd, Whether Forts and Caſtles are neceſſary, &c.

In the Opinion of a former Seſſions, Forts and Caſtles were thought ne­ceſſary; and that they are in Fact ſo, appears upon ſeveral Accounts.

Firſt, Becauſe thoſe Parts are divided into ſeveral Petty-Kingdoms, gene­rally at War amongſt themſelves, and with whom no ſecurity can be had, but what Force maintains: And ſhould we not have Forts and Caſtles to defend our Effects that lye there for a Market, and ſuch as we buy, and lye ready for our Ships, they would be ſeized by the very Natives themſelves, or by ſome Europeans with whom we may have War, and who have Forts and Caſtles upon thoſe Coaſts.

Secondly, They are neceſſary for the Defence of thoſe Kings that are our Allies there, whom from time to time we ſupply with all things neceſſary for their Wars, and ſo preſerve them from their Enemies, and ſecure them our Friends. — And it is obſervable, that all Nations, trading to thoſe Parts, do maintain Forts and Caſtles and the African Company have been at no leſs than 450000 l. in the Purchaſe and Defence of thoſe Forts and Caſtles, and other Europeans at a proportional Charge in theirs: Now nothing leſs than Diſtraction muſt poſſeſs us and our Neighbours, to be at ſuch vaſt Expence to maintain what was not neceſſary to be done.

If Forts and Caſtles are neceſſary, then the next thing that ſeems to be con­ſidered, is, Whether a Regulated Company with a Joynt Stock (as the Afri­can Company will be, if this Bill paſſes,) with a Liberty to all others to Trade upon as eaſy Terms as the Company it ſelf, or a Regulated Company without a Joynt Stock, will carry on this Trade to the beſt Advantage of England and the Plantations.

That a Regulated Company with a Stock, and Liberty to all others to Trade upon equal Charge, will beſt ſecure and carry on the Trade, ſeems plain for ſeveral Reaſons.

• Firſt, The Company being oblig'd to employ their Stock in Trade will be conſequently bound in War as well as Peace, to maintain thoſe Forts and Ca­ſtles for ſecurity of their Effects — whereas in time of War a Company without a Stock might decline their Trade, and ſo thoſe Forts and Caſtles would become a Prey, either to the Natives themſelves, or (which is moſt probable) to our Enemies, who now have, and will ſtill maintain their Forts and Caſtles; and then the Trade, with our Forts and Caſtles, will be either loſt to us, or carried on as Tributaries to thoſe Europeans into whoſe hands thoſe Defenſes ſhall fall — This moſt plainly appears by that inſtance be­tween the Dutch and Portegueſe — for when Portugal had thoſe Forts and Caſtles there the Dutch now have, Holland paid the other Tribute for Liberty to Trade: but as ſoon as the Dutch became Maſters of the Forts and Caſtles, the Tables were turn'd, and Portugal paid that Tribute to the Dutch, which they before receiv'd from them. —
• Secondly, The Plantations will be certainly ſerv'd with Negroes in War as well as Peace, and can't be impoſed upon in Price, whilſt themſelves as well as others may fetch them if they ſhall think it proper to Trade.
• Thirdly, Gentlemen, Widows, Orphans, or others, not bred to Trade, may in this Stock employ their Monies, both to their own and Nations advan­tage, whereas in a Company without a Stock this can t be done.
• Fourthly, The African Company by this Bill may be obliged to make Entries of all their Exports, and to keep a true account of all their Charge in relation to thoſe•orts and Caſtles, and allow incidents neceſſary for the general ſup­port of this Trade, and as often as ſhall be thought neceſſary to give this Ac­count upon Oath; ſo that if too high a Duty be impos'd, in the next Seſſions it may be leſſened, or if too little, then rais'd in a due proportion, ſo that the Company may loſe if leſs than is neceſſary be laid, but they can be no Gainers whilſt they are thus accountable and ſubject to the Regulations of the very next Seſſions of Parliament, &c. Other Reaſons may be given, but I do humbly conceive theſe ſufficient.

Obj. Whereas it is objected by ſome, That a Joynt-Stock is prejudicial to Trade, and therefore this Company with a Joynt-Stock deſerves no Encou­ragement.

Anſw. There is nothing can be ſaid againſt a Joynt-Stock in a Regulated Company, with a liberty to all others to Trade upon equal Terms with the Company (as this will be, if the Bill paſs) but what holds as ſtrong againſt a large Copartnerſhip: And it's reaſonably believ'd, that ſome of the chief Merchants that now oppoſe this Bill, would (in caſe this Bill be rejected) en­ter in that Copartnerſhip, and then will endeavour to impoſe that Egyptian Bondage (upon Trade) which they pretend to fear from the Company upon paſſing this Bill: And there would be ſome danger from ſuch a Copartner­ſhip,3 but there can be none from the Company under this Bill: For ſhould the Company after this Bill, oppreſs their Fellow-Subjects (then in Conſcience as well as Law entitled to an equal liberty in the Trade,) they would deſer­vedly incur the juſt Indignation of the next Parliament, who would not only deprive them of any Power to repeat the ſame, but in probability, of their very Being, and diſſolve their Charter: So that nothing leſs than Self-preſer­vation (the greateſt Obligation poſſible) binds them to a civil Treatment to­wards their Fellow Subjects. As for the former Carriage of the Company, whilſt they thought the Powers of their Charter Legal, that can't reaſona­bly be fear'd under this Bill, when they know that others as well as themſelves, are legally entitled to that Trade. But a large Copartnerſhip will receive no ſuch Prejudice from being diſſolv'd, as a Diſſolution would prove to the Com­pany: And therefore though the Trade may be damnified by ſuch a Copart­nerſhip, there can be no danger from the Company, for the Reaſon before­mentioned.

As for the Cambia Trade, which by the Bill is propoſed to be ſecured to the Company; if this Honourable Houſe ſhall think fit to open that to all others, it's hoped ſuch a ſeparate Duty ſhall be laid, as may be proportionable to the Charge of the Building the Forts and Caſtles, and the Annual ſupport of the Trade — The Fort will coſt the Company 20000l. and the Annual Ex­pence not leſs than 6000 l. and the Trade thither was never for above 10000 l. per Annum

Ever ſince the Parliament Voted that it was the undoubted Right of all the Subjects of England to Trade to Foreign Parts — none of thoſe Free Tra­ders have ever brought to the Parliament a Bill to ſettle this Trade, but ſtill op­poſed what was offered by the Company for ſettling the ſame.

The reaſon whereof is plain, becauſe thoſe Free Traders (as they truly call themſelves, having never contributed to what was neceſſary for the gene­ral ſupport of the Trade) had juſt cauſe to believe that under ſuch a Regula­tion, whatſoever it ſhould be, they muſt Pay towards what by the Parlia­ment ſhould be thought neceſſary for the general Intereſt of that Trade — whereas if they could continue that heavy load upon the African Company only by oppoſing this Bill, they ſhould then enjoy their Trade without that Expence — So that theſe Free Traders have for about Nine years laſt paſt ſince they have had a Liberty to Trade, continued no leſs burthen upon the Company than 25000 l. per Ann. communibus Annis, during this War, but would never touch this weight with one of their Fingers, though themſelves received great Profit thereby, and be equally protected in their Factories and Effects, with what belongs to the Company it ſelf.

But it's now humbly hoped, this Honourable houſe will put thoſe Free Traders and the Company, for the future, upon a juſt Ballance, by giving counte­nance to this Bill, which (with all ſubmiſſion) can give no advantage to the Company above other Traders, whilſt their own Effects will be liable to the ſame charge with other Mens — And a general good ought to be ſupported by all that have benefit thereby, (viz.) Thoſe Forts and Caſtles, ſo neceſſary for the common Advantage of this Trade, the ſupport whereof hath lain too heavy upon the preſent Company, who do therefore by this Bill humbly apply themſelves to this Honourable Houſe for their Relief in the Premiſes