資本論 CHAPTER 31: THE GENESIS OF THE INDUSTRIAL CAPITALIST

The

genesis

of

the

industrial1capitalist

did

not

proceed

in

such

a

gradual

way

as

that

of

the

farmer.

Doubtless

many

small

guild-masters,and

yet

more

independent

small

artisans,

or

even

wage

labourers,

transformed

themselves

into

small

capitalists,

and

(by

gradually

extending

exploitation

of

wage

labour

and

corresponding

accumulation)

into

full-blown

capitalists.

In

the

infancy

of

capitalist

production,

things

often

happened

as

in

the

infancy

of

medieval

towns,

where

the

question,

which

of

the

escaped

serfs

should

be

master

and

which

servant,

was

in

great

part

decided

by

the

earlier

or

later

date

of

their

flight.

The

snail's

pace

of

this

method

corresponded

in

no

wise

with

the

commercial

requirements

of

the

new

world

market

that

the

great

discoveries

of

the

end

of

the

15th

century

created.

But

the

middle

ages

had

handed

down

two

distinct

forms

of

capital,which

mature

in

the

most

different

economic

social

formations,

and

which

before

the

era

of

the

capitalist

mode

of

production,

are

considered

as

capital

quand

même

[all

the

same]

–

usurer's

capital

and

merchant's

capital.

\"At

present,

all

the

wealth

of

society

goes

first

into

the

possession

of

the

capitalist

...

he

pays

the

landowner

his

rent,

the

labourer

his

wages,the

tax

and

tithe

gatherer

their

claims,

and

keeps

a

large,

indeed

the

largest,

and

a

continually

augmenting

share,

of

the

annual

produce

of

labour

for

himself.

The

capitalist

may

now

be

said

to

be

the

first

owner

of

all

the

wealth

of

the

community,

though

no

law

has

conferred

on

him

the

right

to

this

property...

this

change

has

been

effected

by

the

taking

of

interest

on

capital

...

and

it

is

not

a

little

curious

that

all

the

law-givers

of

Europe

endeavoured

to

prevent

this

by

statutes,

viz.,

statutes

against

usury....

The

power

of

the

capitalist

over

all

the

wealth

of

the

country

is

a

complete

change

in

the

right

of

property,

and

by

what

law,

or

series

of

laws,

was

it

effected\"2

The

author

should

have

remembered

that

revolutions

are

not

made

by

laws.

The

money

capital

formed

by

means

of

usury

and

commerce

was

prevented

from

turning

into

industrial

capital,

in

the

country

by

the

feudal

constitution,

in

the

towns

by

the

guild

organisation.3These

fetters

vanished

with

the

dissolution

of

feudal

society,

with

the

expropriation

and

partial

eviction

of

the

country

population.

The

new

manufactures

were

established

at

sea-ports,

or

at

inland

points

beyond

the

control

of

the

old

municipalities

and

their

guilds.

Hence

in

England

an

embittered

struggle

of

the

corporate

towns

against

these

new

industrial

nurseries.

The

discovery

of

gold

and

silver

in

America,

the

extirpation,

enslavement

and

entombment

in

mines

of

the

aboriginal

population,

the

beginning

of

the

conquest

and

looting

of

the

East

Indies,

the

turning

of

Africa

into

a

warren

for

the

commercial

hunting

of

black-skins,

signalised

the

rosy

dawn

of

the

era

of

capitalist

production.

These

idyllic

proceedings

are

the

chief

momenta

of

primitive

accumulation.

On

their

heels

treads

the

commercial

war

of

the

European

nations,

with

the

globe

for

a

theatre.

It

begins

with

the

revolt

of

the

Netherlands

from

Spain,

assumes

giant

dimensions

in

England's

Anti-Jacobin

War,

and

is

still

going

on

in

the

opium

wars

against

China,

&c.

The

different

momenta

of

primitive

accumulation

distribute

themselves

now,

more

or

less

in

chronological

order,

particularly

over

Spain,

Portugal,Holland,

France,

and

England.

In

England

at

the

end

of

the

17th

century,

they

arrive

at

a

systematical

combination,

embracing

the

colonies,

the

national

debt,

the

modern

mode

of

taxation,

and

the

protectionist

system.

These

methods

depend

in

part

on

brute

force,

e.g.,

the

colonial

system.

But,

they

all

employ

the

power

of

the

State,

the

concentrated

and

organised

force

of

society,

to

hasten,

hot-house

fashion,

the

process

of

transformation

of

the

feudal

mode

of

production

into

the

capitalist

mode,

and

to

shorten

the

transition.

Force

is

the

midwife

of

every

old

society

pregnant

with

a

new

one.

It

is

itself

an

economic

power.

Of

the

Christian

colonial

system,

W.

Howitt,

a

man

who

makes

a

speciality

of

Christianity,

says:

\"The

barbarities

and

desperate

outrages

of

the

so-called

Christian

race,

throughout

every

region

of

the

world,

and

upon

every

people

they

have

been

able

to

subdue,

are

not

to

be

paralleled

by

those

of

any

other

race,

however

fierce,

however

untaught,

and

however

reckless

of

mercy

and

of

shame,

in

any

age

of

the

earth.\"

4

The

history

of

the

colonial

administration

of

Holland–

and

Holland

was

the

head

capitalistic

nation

of

the

17th

century

–

\"is

one

of

the

most

extraordinary

relations

of

treachery,

bribery,

massacre,

and

meanness\"5

Nothing

is

more

characteristic

than

their

system

of

stealing

men,

to

get

slaves

for

Java.

The

men

stealers

were

trained

for

this

purpose.

The

thief,

the

interpreter,

and

the

seller,

were

the

chief

agents

in

this

trade,

native

princes

the

chief

sellers.

The

young

people

stolen,

were

thrown

into

the

secret

dungeons

of

Celebes,

until

they

were

ready

for

sending

to

the

slave-ships.

An

official

report

says:

\"This

one

town

of

Macassar,

e.g.,

is

full

of

secret

prisons,

one

more

horrible

than

the

other,

crammed

with

unfortunates,

victims

of

greed

and

tyranny

fettered

in

chains,

forcibly

torn

from

their

families.\"

To

secure

Malacca,

the

Dutch

corrupted

the

Portuguese

governor.

He

let

them

into

the

town

in

1641.

They

hurried

at

once

to

his

house

and

assassinated

him,

to\"abstain\"

from

the

payment

of

￡21,875,

the

price

of

his

treason.

Wherever

they

set

foot,

devastation

and

depopulation

followed.

Banjuwangi,

a

province

of

Java,

in

1750

numbered

over

80,000

inhabitants,

in

1811

only

18,000.

Sweet

commerce!

The

English

East

India

Company,

as

is

well

known,obtained,

besides

the

political

rule

in

India,

the

exclusive

monopoly

of

the

tea-trade,

as

well

as

of

the

Chinese

trade

in

general,

and

of

the

transport

of

goods

to

and

from

Europe.

But

the

coasting

trade

of

India

and

between

the

islands,

as

well

as

the

internal

trade

of

India,

were

the

monopoly

of

the

higher

employés

of

the

company.

The

monopolies

of

salt,

opium,

betel

and

other

commodities,

were

inexhaustible

mines

of

wealth.

The

employés

themselves

fixed

the

price

and

plundered

at

will

the

unhappy

Hindus.

The

Governor

General

took

part

in

this

private

traffic.

His

favourites

received

contracts

under

conditions

whereby

they,cleverer

than

the

alchemists,

made

gold

out

of

nothing.Great

fortunes

sprang

up

like

mushrooms

in

a

day;primitive

accumulation

went

on

without

the

advance

of

a

shilling.

The

trial

of

Warren

Hastings

swarms

with

such

cases.

Here

is

an

instance.

A

contract

for

opium

was

given

to

a

certain

Sullivan

at

the

moment

of

his

departure

on

an

official

mission

to

a

part

of

India

far

removed

from

the

opium

district.

Sullivan

sold

his

contract

to

one

Binn

for

￡40,000;

Binn

sold

it

the

same

day

for

￡60,000,

and

the

ultimate

purchaser

who

carried

out

the

contract

declared

that

after

all

he

realised

an

enormous

gain.

According

to

one

of

the

lists

laid

before

Parliament,

the

Company

and

its

employés

from

1757-1766

got

￡6,000,000

from

the

Indians

as

gifts.

Between

1769

and

1770,

the

English

manufactured

a

famine

by

buying

up

all

the

rice

and

refusing

to

sell

it

again,

except

at

fabulous

prices.6

The

treatment

of

the

aborigines

was,

naturally,

most

frightful

in

plantation-colonies

destined

for

export

trade

only,

such

as

the

West

Indies,

and

in

rich

and

well-populated

countries,

such

as

Mexico

and

India,that

were

given

over

to

plunder.

But

even

in

the

colonies

properly

so

called,

the

Christian

character

of

primitive

accumulation

did

not

belie

itself.

Those

sober

virtuosi

of

Protestantism,

the

Puritans

of

New

England,

in

1703,

by

decrees

of

their

assembly

set

a

premium

of

￡40

on

every

Indian

scalp

and

every

captured

red-skin:

in

1720

a

premium

of

￡100

on

every

scalp;

in

1744,

after

Massachusetts-Bay

had

proclaimed

a

certain

tribe

as

rebels,

the

following

prices:

for

a

male

scalp

of

12

years

and

upwards

￡100(new

currency),

for

a

male

prisoner

￡105,

for

women

and

children

prisoners

￡50,

for

scalps

of

women

and

children

￡50.

Some

decades

later,

the

colonial

system

took

its

revenge

on

the

descendants

of

the

pious

pilgrim

fathers,

who

had

grown

seditious

in

the

meantime.

At

English

instigation

and

for

English

pay

they

were

tomahawked

by

red-skins.

The

British

Parliament

proclaimed

bloodhounds

and

scalping

as\"means

that

God

and

Nature

had

given

into

its

hand.\"

The

colonial

system

ripened,

like

a

hot-house,trade

and

navigation.

The

\"societies

Monopolia\"

of

Luther

were

powerful

levers

for

concentration

of

capital.

The

colonies

secured

a

market

for

the

budding

manufactures,

and,

through

the

monopoly

of

the

market,

an

increased

accumulation.

The

treasures

captured

outside

Europe

by

undisguised

looting,enslavement,

and

murder,

floated

back

to

the

mother

country

and

were

there

turned

into

capital.

Holland,which

first

fully

developed

the

colonial

system,

in

1648

stood

already

in

the

acme

of

its

commercial

greatness.

It

was

\"in

almost

exclusive

possession

of

the

East

Indian

trade

and

the

commerce

between

the

south-east

and

north-west

of

Europe.

Its

fisheries,

marine,

manufactures,

surpassed

those

of

any

other

country.

The

total

capital

of

the

Republic

was

probably

more

important

than

that

of

all

the

rest

of

Europe

put

together.\"

Gülich

forgets

to

add

that

by

1648,

the

people

of

Holland

were

more

over

worked,

poorer

and

more

brutally

oppressed

than

those

of

all

the

rest

of

Europe

put

together.

Today

industrial

supremacy

implies

commercial

supremacy.

In

the

period

of

manufacture

properly

so

called,

it

is,

on

the

other

hand,

the

commercial

supremacy

that

gives

industrial

predominance.

Hence

the

preponderant

rle

that

the

colonial

system

plays

at

that

time.

It

was

\"the

strange

God\"

who

perched

himself

on

the

altar

cheek

by

jowl

with

the

old

Gods

of

Europe,

and

one

fine

day

with

a

shove

and

a

kick

chucked

them

all

of

a

heap.

It

proclaimed

surplus

value

making

as

the

sole

end

and

aim

of

humanity.

The

system

of

public

credit,

i.e.,

of

national

debts,whose

origin

we

discover

in

Genoa

and

Venice

as

early

as

the

Middle

Ages,

took

possession

of

Europe

generally

during

the

manufacturing

period.The

colonial

system

with

its

maritime

trade

and

commercial

wars

served

as

a

forcing-house

for

it.Thus

it

first

took

root

in

Holland.

National

debts,i.e.,

the

alienation

of

the

state

–

whether

despotic,constitutional

or

republican

–

marked

with

its

stamp

the

capitalistic

era.

The

only

part

of

the

so-called

national

wealth

that

actually

enters

into

the

collective

possessions

of

modern

peoples

is

their

national

debt.7Hence,

as

a

necessary

consequence,

the

modern

doctrine

that

a

nation

becomes

the

richer

the

more

deeply

it

is

in

debt.

Public

credit

becomes

the

credo

of

capital.

And

with

the

rise

of

national

debt-making,

want

of

faith

in

the

national

debt

takes

the

place

of

the

blasphemy

against

the

Holy

Ghost,

which

may

not

be

forgiven.

The

public

debt

becomes

one

of

the

most

powerful

levers

of

primitive

accumulation.

As

with

the

stroke

of

an

enchanter's

wand,

it

endows

barren

money

with

the

power

of

breeding

and

thus

turns

it

into

capital,without

the

necessity

of

its

exposing

itself

to

the

troubles

and

risks

inseparable

from

its

employment

in

industry

or

even

in

usury.

The

state

creditors

actually

give

nothing

away,

for

the

sum

lent

is

transformed

into

public

bonds,

easily

negotiable,

which

go

on

functioning

in

their

hands

just

as

so

much

hard

cash

would.

But

further,

apart

from

the

class

of

lazy

annuitants

thus

created,

and

from

the

improvised

wealth

of

the

financiers,

middlemen

between

the

government

and

the

nation

–

as

also

apart

from

the

tax-farmers,

merchants,

private

manufacturers,

to

whom

a

good

part

of

every

national

loan

renders

the

service

of

a

capital

fallen

from

heaven

–

the

national

debt

has

given

rise

to

joint-stock

companies,to

dealings

in

negotiable

effects

of

all

kinds,

and

to

agiotage,

in

a

word

to

stock-exchange

gambling

and

the

modern

bankocracy.

At

their

birth

the

great

banks,

decorated

with

national

titles,

were

only

associations

of

private

speculators,

who

placed

themselves

by

the

side

of

governments,

and,

thanks

to

the

privileges

they

received,

were

in

a

position

to

advance

money

to

the

State.

Hence

the

accumulation

of

the

national

debt

has

no

more

infallible

measure

than

the

successive

rise

in

the

stock

of

these

banks,

whose

full

development

dates

from

the

founding

of

the

Bank

of

England

in

1694.

The

Bank

of

England

began

with

lending

its

money

to

the

Government

at

8%;

at

the

same

time

it

was

empowered

by

Parliament

to

coin

money

out

of

the

same

capital,

by

lending

it

again

to

the

public

in

the

form

of

banknotes.

It

was

allowed

to

use

these

notes

for

discounting

bills,

making

advances

on

commodities,

and

for

buying

the

precious

metals.

It

was

not

long

ere

this

credit-money,

made

by

the

bank

itself,

became

the

coin

in

which

the

Bank

of

England

made

its

loans

to

the

State,

and

paid,

on

account

of

the

State,

the

interest

on

the

public

debt.

It

was

not

enough

that

the

bank

gave

with

one

hand

and

took

back

more

with

the

other;

it

remained,

even

whilst

receiving,the

eternal

creditor

of

the

nation

down

to

the

last

shilling

advanced.

Gradually

it

became

inevitably

the

receptacle

of

the

metallic

hoard

of

the

country,

and

the

centre

of

gravity

of

all

commercial

credit.

What

effect

was

produced

on

their

contemporaries

by

the

sudden

uprising

of

this

brood

of

bankocrats,

financiers,rentiers,

brokers,

stock-jobbers,

&c.,

is

proved

by

the

writings

of

that

time,

e.g.,

by

Bolingbroke's.8

With

the

national

debt

arose

an

international

credit

system,

which

often

conceals

one

of

the

sources

of

primitive

accumulation

in

this

or

that

people.Thus

the

villainies

of

the

Venetian

thieving

system

formed

one

of

the

secret

bases

of

the

capital-wealth

of

Holland

to

whom

Venice

in

her

decadence

lent

large

sums

of

money.

So

also

was

it

with

Holland

and

England.

By

the

beginning

of

the

18th

century

the

Dutch

manufactures

were

far

outstripped.

Holland

had

ceased

to

be

the

nation

preponderant

in

commerce

and

industry.

One

of

its

main

lines

of

business,

therefore,from

1701-1776,

is

the

lending

out

of

enormous

amounts

of

capital,

especially

to

its

great

rival

England.

The

same

thing

is

going

on

today

between

England

and

the

United

States.

A

great

deal

of

capital,which

appears

today

in

the

United

States

without

any

certificate

of

birth,

was

yesterday,

in

England,

the

capitalised

blood

of

children.

As

the

national

debt

finds

its

support

in

the

public

revenue,

which

must

cover

the

yearly

payments

for

interest,

&c.,

the

modern

system

of

taxation

was

the

necessary

complement

of

the

system

of

national

loans.

The

loans

enable

the

government

to

meet

extraordinary

expenses,

without

the

tax-payers

feeling

it

immediately,

but

they

necessitate,

as

a

consequence,

increased

taxes.

On

the

other

hand,the

raising

of

taxation

caused

by

the

accumulation

of

debts

contracted

one

after

another,

compels

the

government

always

to

have

recourse

to

new

loans

for

new

extraordinary

expenses.

Modern

fiscality,whose

pivot

is

formed

by

taxes

on

the

most

necessary

means

of

subsistence

(thereby

increasing

their

price),thus

contains

within

itself

the

germ

of

automatic

progression.

Overtaxation

is

not

an

incident,

but

rather

a

principle.

In

Holland,

therefore,

where

this

system

was

first

inaugurated,

the

great

patriot,

DeWitt,

has

in

his

\"Maxims\"

extolled

it

as

the

best

system

for

making

the

wage

labourer

submissive,

frugal,

industrious,

and

overburdened

with

labour.

The

destructive

influence

that

it

exercises

on

the

condition

of

the

wage

labourer

concerns

us

less

however,

here,

than

the

forcible

expropriation,

resulting

from

it,

of

peasants,

artisans,and

in

a

word,

all

elements

of

the

lower

middle

class.On

this

there

are

not

two

opinions,

even

among

the

bourgeois

economists.

Its

expropriating

efficacy

is

still

further

heightened

by

the

system

of

protection,

which

forms

one

of

its

integral

parts.

The

great

part

that

the

public

debt,

and

the

fiscal

system

corresponding

with

it,

has

played

in

the

capitalisation

of

wealth

and

the

expropriation

of

the

masses,

has

led

many

writers,

like

Cobbett,

Doubleday

and

others,

to

seek

in

this,

incorrectly,

the

fundamental

cause

of

the

misery

of

the

modern

peoples.

The

system

of

protection

was

an

artificial

means

of

manufacturing

manufacturers,

of

expropriating

independent

labourers,

of

capitalising

the

national

means

of

production

and

subsistence,

of

forcibly

abbreviating

the

transition

from

the

medieval

to

the

modern

mode

of

production.

The

European

states

tore

one

another

to

pieces

about

the

patent

of

this

invention,

and,

once

entered

into

the

service

of

the

surplus-value

makers,

did

not

merely

lay

under

contribution

in

the

pursuit

of

this

purpose

their

own

people,

indirectly

through

protective

duties,

directly

through

export

premiums.

They

also

forcibly

rooted

out,

in

their

dependent

countries,

all

industry,

as,

e.g.,England

did.

with

the

Irish

woollen

manufacture.

On

the

continent

of

Europe,

after

Colbert's

example,

the

process

was

much

simplified.

The

primitive

industrial

capital,

here,

came

in

part

directly

out

of

the

state

treasury.

\"Why,\"

cries

Mirabeau,

\"why

go

so

far

to

seek

the

cause

of

the

manufacturing

glory

of

Saxony

before

the

war

180,000,000

of

debts

contracted

by

the

sovereigns!\"9

Colonial

system,

public

debts,

heavy

taxes,protection,

commercial

wars,

&c.,

these

children

of

the

true

manufacturing

period,

increase

gigantically

during

the

infancy

of

Modem

Industry.

The

birth

of

the

latter

is

heralded

by

a

great

slaughter

of

the

innocents.

Like

the

royal

navy,

the

factories

were

recruited

by

means

of

the

press-gang.

Blasé

as

Sir

F.M.

Eden

is

as

to

the

horrors

of

the

expropriation

of

the

agricultural

population

from

the

soil,

from

the

last

third

of

the

15th

century

to

his

own

time;

with

all

the

self-satisfaction

with

which

he

rejoices

in

this

process,\"essential\"

for

establishing

capitalistic

agriculture

and\"the

due

proportion

between

arable

and

pasture

land\"–

he

does

not

show,

however,

the

same

economic

insight

in

respect

to

the

necessity

of

child-stealing

and

child-slavery

for

the

transformation

of

manufacturing

exploitation

into

factory

exploitation,

and

the

establishment

of

the

\"true

relation\"

between

capital

and

labour-power.

He

says:

\"It

may,

perhaps,

be

worthy

the

attention

of

the

public

to

consider,

whether

any

manufacture,which,

in

order

to

be

carried

on

successfully,requires

that

cottages

and

workhouses

should

be

ransacked

for

poor

children;

that

they

should

be

employed

by

turns

during

the

greater

part

of

the

night

and

robbed

of

that

rest

which,

though

indispensable

to

all,

is

most

required

by

the

young;and

that

numbers

of

both

sexes,

of

different

ages

and

dispositions,

should

be

collected

together

in

such

a

manner

that

the

contagion

of

example

cannot

but

lead

to

profligacy

and

debauchery;

will

add

to

the

sum

of

individual

or

national

felicity\"10

\"In

the

counties

of

Derbyshire,

Nottinghamshire,and

more

particularly

in

Lancashire,\"

says

Fielden,\"the

newly-invented

machinery

was

used

in

large

factories

built

on

the

sides

of

streams

capable

of

turning

the

water-wheel.

Thousands

of

hands

were

suddenly

required

in

these

places,

remote

from

towns;

and

Lancashire,

in

particular,

being,

till

then,

comparatively

thinly

populated

and

barren,

a

population

was

all

that

she

now

wanted.

The

small

and

nimble

fingers

of

little

children

being

by

very

far

the

most

in

request,

the

custom

instantly

sprang

up

of

procuring

apprentices

from

the

different

parish

workhouses

of

London,

Birmingham,

and

elsewhere.

Many,

many

thousands

of

these

little,hapless

creatures

were

sent

down

into

the

north,being

from

the

age

of

7

to

the

age

of

13

or

14

years

old.

The

custom

was

for

the

master

to

clothe

his

apprentices

and

to

feed

and

lodge

them

in

an\"apprentice

house\"

near

the

factory;

overseers

were

appointed

to

see

to

the

works,

whose

interest

it

was

to

work

the

children

to

the

utmost,

because

their

pay

was

in

proportion

to

the

quantity

of

work

that

they

could

exact.

Cruelty

was,

of

course,

the

consequence.

...

In

many

of

the

manufacturing

districts,

but

particularly,

I

am

afraid,

in

the

guilty

county

to

which

I

belong

[Lancashire],cruelties

the

most

heart-rending

were

practised

upon

the

unoffending

and

friendless

creatures

who

were

thus

consigned

to

the

charge

of

master

manufacturers;

they

were

harassed

to

the

brink

of

death

by

excess

of

labour

...

were

flogged,

fettered

and

tortured

in

the

most

exquisite

refinement

of

cruelty;

...

they

were

in

many

cases

starved

to

the

bone

while

flogged

to

their

work

and

...

even

in

some

instances

...

were

driven

to

commit

suicide....

The

beautiful

and

romantic

valleys

of

Derbyshire,

Nottinghamshire

and

Lancashire,

secluded

from

the

public

eye,

became

the

dismal

solitudes

of

torture,

and

of

many

a

murder.

The

profits

of

manufacturers

were

enormous;

but

this

only

whetted

the

appetite

that

it

should

have

satisfied,

and

therefore

the

manufacturers

had

recourse

to

an

expedient

that

seemed

to

secure

to

them

those

profits

without

any

possibility

of

limit;

they

began

the

practice

of

what

is

termed

\"night-working,\"

that

is,

having

tired

one

set

of

hands,

by

working

them

throughout

the

day,

they

had

another

set

ready

to

go

on

working

throughout

the

night;

the

day-set

getting

into

the

beds

that

the

night-set

had

just

quitted,

and

in

their

turn

again,

the

night-set

getting

into

the

beds

that

the

day-set

quitted

in

the

morning.

It

is

a

common

tradition

in

Lancashire,

that

the

beds

never

get

cold.\"

11

With

the

development

of

capitalist

production

during

the

manufacturing

period,

the

public

opinion

of

Europe

had

lost

the

last

remnant

of

shame

and

conscience.The

nations

bragged

cynically

of

every

infamy

that

served

them

as

a

means

to

capitalistic

accumulation.Read,

e.g.,

the

nave

Annals

of

Commerce

of

the

worthy

A.

Anderson.

Here

it

is

trumpeted

forth

as

a

triumph

of

English

statecraft

that

at

the

Peace

of

Utrecht,

England

extorted

from

the

Spaniards

by

the

Asiento

Treaty

the

privilege

of

being

allowed

to

ply

the

negro

trade,

until

then

only

carried

on

between

Africa

and

the

English

West

Indies,

between

Africa

and

Spanish

America

as

well.

England

thereby

acquired

the

right

of

supplying

Spanish

America

until

1743

with

4,800

negroes

yearly.

This

threw,

at

the

same

time,

an

official

cloak

over

British

smuggling.Liverpool

waxed

fat

on

the

slave

trade.

This

was

its

method

of

primitive

accumulation.

And,

even

to

the

present

day,

Liverpool

\"respectability\"

is

the

Pindar

of

the

slave

trade

which

–

compare

the

work

of

Aikin[1795]

already

quoted

–

\"has

coincided

with

that

spirit

of

bold

adventure

which

has

characterised

the

trade

of

Liverpool

and

rapidly

carried

it

to

its

present

state

of

prosperity;

has

occasioned

vast

employment

for

shipping

and

sailors,

and

greatly

augmented

the

demand

for

the

manufactures

of

the

country\"

(p.

339).Liverpool

employed

in

the

slave-trade,

in

1730,

15

ships;

in

1751,

53;

in

1760,

74;

in

1770,

96;

and

in

1792,

132.12

Whilst

the

cotton

industry

introduced

child-slavery

in

England,

it

gave

in

the

United

States

a

stimulus

to

the

transformation

of

the

earlier,

more

or

less

patriarchal

slavery,

into

a

system

of

commercial

exploitation.

In

fact,

the

veiled

slavery

of

the

wage

workers

in

Europe

needed,

for

its

pedestal,

slavery

pure

and

simple

in

the

new

world.

Tantae

molis

erat,

to

establish

the

\"eternal

laws

of

Nature\"

of

the

capitalist

mode

of

production,

to

complete

the

process

of

separation

between

labourers

and

conditions

of

labour,

to

transform,

at

one

pole,the

social

means

of

production

and

subsistence

into

capital,

at

the

opposite

pole,

the

mass

of

the

population

into

wage

labourers,

into

\"free

labouring

poor,\"

that

artificial

product

of

modern

society.13If

money,

according

to

Augier,14\"comes

into

the

worldwith

a

congenital

blood-stain

on

one

cheek,\"

capital

comes

dripping

from

head

to

foot,

from

every

pore,with

blood

and

dirt.15

NOTES:

1Industrial

here

in

contradistinction

to

agricultural.

In

the

\"categoric\"

sense

the

farmer

is

an

industrial

capitalist

as

much

as

the

manufacturer.

2\"The

Natural

and

Artificial

Rights

of

Property

Contrasted.\"Lond.,

1832,

pp.

98-99.

Author

of

the

anonymous

work:

\"Th.Hodgskin.\"

3Even

as

late

as

1794,

the

small

cloth-makers

of

Leeds

sent

a

deputation

to

Parliament,

with

a

petition

for

a

law

to

forbid

any

merchant

from

becoming

a

manufacturer.

(Dr.

Aikin,

l.

c.)

4William

Howitt:

\"Colonisation

and

Christianity:

A

Popular

History

of

the

Treatment

of

the

Natives

by

the

Europeans

in

all

their

Colonies.\"

London,

1838,

p.

9.

On

the

treatment

of

the

slaves

there

is

a

good

compilation

in

Charles

Comte,

\"Traité

de

la

Législation.\"

3me

éd.

Bruxelles,

1837.

This

subject

one

must

study

in

detail,

to

see

what

the

bourgeoisie

makes

of

itself

and

of

the

labourer,

wherever

it

can,

without

restraint,

model

the

world

after

its

own

image.

5Thomas

Stamford

Raffles,

late

Lieut-Gov.

of

that

island:\"The

History

of

Java,\"

Lond.,

1817.

6In

the

year

1866

more

than

a

million

Hindus

died

of

hunger

in

the

province

of

Orissa

alone.

Nevertheless,

the

attempt

was

made

to

enrich

the

Indian

treasury

by

the

price

at

which

the

necessaries

of

life

were

sold

to

the

starving

people.

7William

Cobbett

remarks

that

in

England

all

public

institutions

are

designated

\"royal\";

as

compensation

for

this,however,

there

is

the

\"national\"

debt.

8\"Si

les

Tartares

inondaient

l'Europe

aujourd'hui,

il

faudrait

bien

des

affaires

pour

leur

faire

entendre

ce

que

c'est

qu'un

financier

parmi

nous.\"

[if

the

Tartars

were

to

flood

into

Europe

today,

it

would

be

a

difficult

job

to

make

them

understand

what

a

financier

is

with

us]

Montesquieu,

\"Esprit

des

lois,\"

t.

iv.,

p.33,

ed.

Londres,

1769.

9Mirabeau,

l.

c.,

t.

vi.,

p.

101.

10Eden,

l.

c.,

Vol.

I.,

Book

II.,

Ch.

1.,

p.

421.

11John

Fielden,

l.

c.,

pp.

5,

6.

On

the

earlier

infamies

of

the

factory

system,

cf.

Dr.

Aikin

(1795),

l.

c.,

p.

219.

and

Gisborne:\"Enquiry

into

the

Duties

of

Men,\"

1795

Vol.

II.

When

the

steam-engine

transplanted

the

factories

from

the

country

waterfalls

to

the

middle

of

towns,

the

\"abstemious\"

surplusvalue

maker

found

the

child-material

ready

to

his

hand,

without

being

forced

to

seek

slaves

from

the

workhouses.

When

Sir

R.Peel

(father

of

the

\"minister

of

plausibility\"),

brought

in

his

bill

for

the

protection

of

children,

in

1815,

Francis

Homer,

lumen

of

the

Billion

Committee

and

intimate

friend

of

Ricardo,

said

in

the

House

of

Commons:

\"It

is

notorious,

that

with

a

bankrupt's

effects,

a

gang,

if

he

might

use

the

word,

of

these

children

had

been

put

up

to

sale,

and

were

advertised

publicly

as

part

of

the

property.

A

most

atrocious

instance

had

been

brought

before

the

Court

of

King's

Bench

two

years

before,

in

which

a

number

of

these

boys,

apprenticed

by

a

parish

in

London

to

one

manufacturer,

had

been

transferred

to

another,

and

had

been

found

by

some

benevolent

persons

in

a

state

of

absolute

famine.

Another

case

more

horrible

had

come

to

his

knowledge

while

on

a

[Parliamentary]

Committee

...

that

not

many

years

ago,

an

agreement

had

been

made

between

a

London

parish

and

a

Lancashire

manufacturer,

by

which

it

was

stipulated,

that

with

every

20

sound

children

one

idiot

should

be

taken.\"

12In

1790,

there

were

in

the

English

West

Indies

ten

slaves

for

one

free

man,

in

the

French

fourteen

for

one,

in

the

Dutch

twenty-three

for

one.

(Henry

Brougham:

\"An

Inquiry

into

the

Colonial

Policy

of

the

European

Powers.\"

Edin.

1803,

vol.

II.,p.

74.)

13The

phrase,

\"labouring

poor,\"

is

found

in

English

legislation

from

the

moment

when

the

class

of

wage

labourers

becomes

noticeable.

This

term

is

used

in

opposition,

on

the

one

hand,

to

the

\"idle

poor,\"

beggars,

etc.,

on

the.

out

and

out

vulgar

bourgeois.

\"The

laws

of

commerce

are

the

laws

of

Nature,

and

therefore

the

laws

of

God.\"

(E.

Burke,

l.

c.,

pp.

31,32.)

No

wonder

that,

true

to

the

laws

of

God

and

of

Nature,

he

always

sold

himself

in

the

best

market.

A

very

good

portrait

of

this

Edmund

Burke,

during

his

liberal

time,

is

to

be

found

in

the

writings

of

the

Rev.

Mr.

Tucker.

Tucker

was

a

parson

and

a

Tory,

but,

for

the

rest,

an

honourable

man

and

a

competent

political

economist.

In

face

of

the

infamous

cowardice

of

character

that

reigns

today,

and

believes

most

devoutly

in

\"the

laws

of

commerce,\"

it

is

our

bounden

duty

again

and

again

to

brand

the

Burkes,

who

only

differ

from

their

successors

in

one

thing

—

talent.

14Marie

Angier:

\"Du

Crédit

Public.\"

Paris,

1842.

15\"Capital

is

said

by

a

Quarterly

Reviewer

to

fly

turbulence

and

strife,

and

to

be

timid,

which

is

very

true;

but

this

is

very

incompletely

stating

the

question.

Capital

eschews

no

profit,or

very

small

profit,

just

as

Nature

was

formerly

said

to

abhor

a

vacuum.

With

adequate

profit,

capital

is

very

bold.

A

certain

10

per

cent.

will

ensure

its

employment

anywhere;

20

per

cent.certain

will

produce

eagerness;

50

per

cent.,

positive

audacity;100

per

cent.

will

make

it

ready

to

trample

on

all

human

laws;300

per

cent.,

and

there

is

not

a

crime

at

which

it

will

scruple,nor

a

risk

it

will

not

run,

even

to

the

chance

of

its

owner

being

hanged.

If

turbulence

and

strife

will

bring

a

profit,

it

will

freely

encourage

both.

Smuggling

and

the

slave-trade

have

amply

proved

all

that

is

here

stated.\"

(T.

J.

Dunning,

l.

c.,

pp.

35,

36.)