On this letter two remarks have occurred: 1. The high compliment paid by Turgot to Dr Smith, in presenting him with the copy of a work of a description so peculiarly valuable; and, 2. That Dr Smith states his having had occasion to consult that work in the business of his employment, namely, as one of the Commissioners for the Management of the Customs in Scotland. It may be proper here to observe, that Dr Smith admitted that he derived great advantage from the practical information he derived by means of his official situation; and that he would not have otherwise known or believed how essential practical knowledge was, to the thorough understanding of political subjects.

In 1782, I had drawn up a tract, pointing out to the armed neutrality the policy of supporting Great Britain against the confederacy of the House of Bourbon, and suggesting a union of the powers of Europe, to emancipate the Colonies, both in the West Indies and on the Continent of America, for the general interest of all nations. Dr Smith's remarks on that pamphlet were contained in the following letter:

MY DEAR SIR,

I have read your pamphlet several times over, with great pleasure, and am very much pleased with the style and composition. As to what effect it might produce, if translated, upon the Powers concerned in the armed neutrality, I am a little doubtful. It is too plainly partial to England. It proposes that the force of the armed neutrality should be employed in recovering to England the islands she has lost; and the compensation which it is proposed that England should give for this service, is the islands which they may conquer for themselves, with the assistance of England, indeed, from France and Spain. There seems to me, besides, to be some inconsistency in the argument. If it be just to emancipate the Continent of America from the dominion of every European power, how can it be just to subject the islands to such dominion? And if the monopoly of the trade

of the Continent be contrary to the rights of mankind, how can that of the islands be agreeable to those rights? The real futility of all distant dominions, of which the defence is necessarily most expensive, and which contribute nothing, either by revenue or military force, to the general defence of the empire, and very little even to their own particular defence, is, I think, the subject upon which the public prejudices of Europe require most to be set right. In order to defend the barren rock of Gibraltar, (to the possession of which we owe the union of France and Spain, contrary to the natural interests and inveterate prejudices of both countries, the important enmity of Spain, and the futile and expensive friendship of Portugal,) we have now left our own coasts defenceless, and sent out a great fleet, to which any considerable disaster may prove fatal to our domestic security; and which, in order to effectuate its purpose, must probably engage a fleet of superior force. Sore eyes have made me delay writing to you so long. I ever am, my Dear Sir, your most faithful and affectionate humble servant,

Custom-House, Edinburgh,

14th October 1782.

ADAM SMITH.

Nothing can be more just than his observations on the absurdity of retaining so invidious a possession as the barren and useless rock of Gibraltar. But humbled as the nation was by the misfortunes of the American war, it would not submit to relinquish that unfortunate acquisition; and Mr Fox's description of it made a great impression, both on Parliament and the public. "We must never give up a possession which divides France from France, and Spain from Spain." But, on the contrary, it was, in fact, uniting France and Spain, who would otherwise have been separated.

I recollect, when I was lamenting to the Doctor the misfortunes of the American war, and exclaimed, "If we go on

at this rate, the nation must be ruined;" he answered," Be assured, my young friend, that there is a great deal of ruin in

a nation."

2.-THE REV. T. ROBERT MALTHUS.

The works of this distinguished political economist have been more praised on the one hand, and more violently attacked on the other, than almost any modern publication. The particular subjects in dispute I shall not at present enter into, having it in view, if health and strength should enable me, to draw up "A Code of Political Economy," in which every branch of that subject shall be discussed. In the interim, I have much pleasure in communicating the subjoined letter to my readers, recommending to their particular attention that part of it which relates to the mode of executing a General Report of the state of a country. In drawing up the General Report of Scotland, I found it necessary to employ a number of hands. The subjects were so various, that there is scarcely any individual who could do justice to them all. If drawn up by one hand, the work may be more uniform; but I scarcely think it possible that it could be so complete.

SIR,

East India College, January 31. 1815.

I am just returned from town, and find your very obliging

note.

I am quite ashamed of having so long delayed thanking you for your very valuable present. The truth is, I wished to read it through first with the attention it deserves; but having been particularly engaged, both in College business, and in preparing a little Tract on Rent for the press, I have really not had time to form a well-grounded opinion on the plan and execution of so considerable a work. I can only

say, at present, that it appears to me to be full of the most useful information; nor do I see any other objection to the plan and execution of it, than what must necessarily arise from the number of different writers concerned. To make a General Report quite complete, perhaps it should be drawn up wholly by one master-hand, with occasional references at the bottom of the page to the different papers on which the information was founded. But there are very few who could properly execute so laborious and difficult a task; and the Report, in its present form, has a more original and authentic air.

I had read your Husbandry of Scotland before you did me the honour to send me the Report. I found it full of interesting information, and some that I particularly wished to obtain.

I have ordered my bookseller to send you the little Tract on Rent, which I have alluded to, and the Appendix to the Observations on the Corn Laws, as soon as it is published, which will be in about five or six days. I have the honour to be, with much respect, your very obedient humble servant, T. ROBT. MALTHUS.

3.-WILLIAM GODWIN, ESQ.

There are few men possessing a stronger intellect, or who think more deeply on any subject they undertake to illustrate, than Mr Godwin. I was therefore extremely anxious to be favoured with his remarks on the sketch of an Introduction, and Chapter I. of my intended Code of Political Economy, some copies of which I printed for the consideration of my friends. His observations on that sketch are so extremely interesting, that I cannot deny myself the pleasure of inserting them here, for the perusal of those who may undertake the task of completing that work, if it should not be in my power to attempt it.

MY DEAR SIR,

Skinner Street, (London), July 16. 1821.

It certainly was not my intention to have troubled you with any remarks on the sketch of an Introduction, and of Chapter I. of a Code of Political Economy, which you did me the honour to send to me for that purpose. In my note of Monday last, I took the liberty of observing, that I had turned my studies to no branch of the subject which your book proposes to treat, except the single one which forms the topic of my late publication, and that I therefore greatly feared that I could not by any means afford you that aid which you had the goodness to anticipate from me.

But the conversation that has passed between us since I wrote, has inspired me with a different feeling. I found in you so much candour, and so sincere a disposition to give its full weight to whatever might be suggested to you by a person who had closely applied his attention to any of the points you propose to treat, that I should hold myself inexcusable if I did not endeavour to throw in my mite of contribution to the purpose you have in hand.

The chief remark with which I troubled you, when I had the pleasure to see you, was, that you seemed, in your first chapter, entirely to have adopted the principle of Mr Malthus, and that that could not, of consequence, appear reasonable to me, who had spent between two and three years in endeavouring to refute that principle, and who persuaded myself that I had accomplished what I undertook. I could not look upon the question of the truth or falsehood of Mr Malthus's principle as a matter of indifference, convinced as I was, that it was pregnant with the most pernicious consequences, and led to a treatment of man in society the most barbarous and inhuman.

To this remark on my part you answered, that I was to consider the sheets you had had the goodness to communicate to me, as a sketch only; that they contained your first thoughts; that these thoughts were all of them liable to revision; and