New Shun 1730

"Yes, there is not much time left for us. The East India Company must completely expel the French before the end of the war in Europe and fully control Bengal's silk, cotton, cotton cloth, linen and saltpeter."

"Time is not on our side. Our personal destiny is bound to the company."

Clive, who desires wealth, fame, and prestige, is also a rational egoist. A true egoist will sometimes behave in ways that seem less selfish and narrow-minded. For example, Clive was not stingy about sharing the wealth he gained in India with his soldiers.

And an egoist like him understands even more that he is a person caught up in the tide of history. If you want to be a self-interested trend-setter on the wave of the times, you must see clearly what the wave of history is like.

Clive said that time was running out for the East India Company. This judgment is consistent with Liu Yu's judgment.

When the world was connected by sailing ships, the concept that things were universally connected has been reflected in world trade.

The War of the Spanish Succession fifty years ago, and the subsequent Treaty of Utrecht, changed many things.

Including the Tang sugar cane slave labor riot in Batavia, to some extent, it was also the aftermath of the Treaty of Utrecht. Because of this treaty, Britain and France were able to obtain slaves and develop their plantation industry in the West Indies, that is, the Caribbean.

This ultimately led to dramatic fluctuations in sugar prices on the world market and Europe's freedom from dependence on Southeast Asian sugar.

And the aftermath has also caused more troublesome problems in Europe.

If France's controlled economy is not managed well, it will easily lead to the emergence of a large number of vested interest groups.

The reasoning behind this is very easy to understand in China. To put it crudely, the four words are closest to each other. Liu Yusong and Su reformed the problem of Nanyang rice and Liaodong wheat [low grain prices hurt farmers].

France is a traditional wine country and also has spirits such as brandy.

The purpose of the Colbert Doctrine is to protect domestic industries, protect domestic industries, increase exports and reduce imports.

So, do the interests of producers, factory owners, workers, and brewing craftsmen who produce wine and brandy need to be protected?

How many years has sugar cane been around? How old is the traditional winemaking industry such as grapes?

The great development of the cane sugar industry in the West Indies will inevitably bring a large amount of molasses, a by-product of the cane sugar industry.

Molasses can be used to make wine, because as long as it contains sugar or can be converted into sugar, it can be used to make wine.

Therefore, in order to protect its traditional industries such as wine and brandy, France strictly prohibits the production of molasses wine and sugar cane wine in France.

Then there's a problem.

With the rapid development of the cane sugar industry, a large amount of molasses cannot be used to make wine, so it cannot be thrown away, right?

But if wine is made, it will have a huge impact on the grape growing industry, grain growing industry, and wine making industry in France.

This is obvious.

This contradiction, manifested in the Songsu area of ​​Dashun, is "should we tax Nanyang rice and Liaodong wheat?" to prevent low prices from hurting farmers.

Their essence is the same.

Nowadays, the molasses from the French West Indies cannot be thrown away directly, nor can it be used to make wine. Naturally, it can only be sold to the British North American colonies for them to make wine.

In addition to the molasses used for brewing, a lot of sugar is also purchased directly from France.

Because North America, as a colony, is within the scope of the Navigation Regulations. Smuggled French sugar, molasses, the residual product of French sugar cane pressing, are all very cheap.

The British East India Company could lobby Congress on the issue of cotton tax.

So, wouldn’t West Indian businessmen know how to lobby? Don’t those planters, sugar producers, etc. know that the current demand for French sugar in North America is seriously damaging their interests?

East India and West India, which one is better? Mature and strong?

Before the invasion and occupation of the entire India, East India was not as big and rich as the islands in West India.

Now, India is not the jewel in the crown.

At this moment, the pearls in the British crown are the string of small islands in the Caribbean.

It's just that the East India Company is a monopoly company organization, closely related to the royal family and organized.

In West India, there are only sporadic West Indian businessmen associations that want to form a cartel monopoly, but no one is taking the lead for the time being.

But the West Indian planters, merchants, ship owners, traders, had united to form the West India Merchants Association.

Of course, things like the Sugar Act, Molasses Act, and sugar tariffs had little impact on the East India Company. After all, they didn't sell much sugar.

However, everyone is a thousand-year-old fox, and those people in West India are not just looking for sugar.

They want to use sugar as an opportunity to play on the fringes of the Navigation Regulations and engage in smuggling trade.

There is a key factor here, that is Ireland.

Ireland is not part of the United Kingdom. According to the Navigation Regulations, it is theoretically a British colony.

And if the goods can be sent to Ireland... Although Ireland is theoretically a colony, as long as the goods can go to Ireland, and from Ireland to the British mainland, it will be much easier.

The Molasses Act of 1733 was a series of legislation, not a single piece of legislation.

The economic base determines the superstructure. The planters and merchants of the West Indies are already wealthy enough to influence the decisions of the British Parliament.

Organizations such as the Federation of West Indian Merchants have emerged and are constantly buying off members of Congress and lobbying in Congress.

The entire set of legislation centered on the "1733 Molasses Act" was actually legislation aimed at safeguarding the capital interests of the West Indies. The Molasses Act, which levied high taxes on foreign sugar, was only part of it, or it was used as an opportunity to To expand the interests of the West India Capital Group.

The key here is to get rid of the Molasses Act so that West Indian capital can use administrative power to suppress cheap foreign sugar. There is another key thing.

That is, West Indian ships do not need to be transshipped in the British mainland and go directly to Ireland and the European continent.

What is being played here is that Ireland is not a British native.

In the Navigation Regulations, of course it was still the Republic of England at that time, but Ireland and the Republic of England existed side by side in the Navigation Regulations.

That is, the UK mainland, excluding Ireland.

Theoretically, according to the Navigation Regulations, all products must be shipped back to the UK before being sold.

For example, East India Company tea.

The East India Company did not open tea shops, but transported the tea to the British mainland, where it levied high taxes and then auctioned it. Finally, the tea was sold by local tea sellers.

In other words, it would be illegal for the East India Company to directly contact local tea sellers, bypassing the middleman of customs duties, and making no profit from the price difference...

Sugar, in theory, is the same.

But theoretical things must be asked.

For example, does Caribbean sugar have to go to the British mainland first, and then be transported from the British mainland to the North American colonies?

Then this is no longer taking off the pants and farting, this is pulling back after pulling the pants.

Therefore, once cracks appear, the problem is easy to find.

Everything needs to be blocked and loosened.

The obstruction of the Molasses Act was to increase tariffs on foreign sugar.

The "Treacle Law" is an intervention to simplify the troublesome process of domestic sugar, reduce tax rates, reduce intermediate links, and simplify administrative power...

And capital is good at turning "sparse" into a breach.

Among them, the West Indian capital group wanted the right to sell directly to the European continent and reduce government intervention. However, in the domestic market, it also hoped that the government would increase supervision of navigation regulations and molasses laws to ensure its domestic monopoly.

Among them, West Indian capital gained the right to sell goods directly to the European continent. This includes southern Europe and northern Europe, and direct trade with them to reduce intermediate links and compete with French sugar.

So, what about Ireland?

Can West Indian merchants go through British distributors and then sell to Ireland without coming to the UK first?

Therefore, if you clear away the fog of history, you can see an interesting scene.

In the parliamentary disputes over a series of bills that benefited West Indian capital, including the Molasses Act in 1733, when the bill was about to be reviewed for final review in 1739, the most intense opposition came from various "handicraft cities" in Britain.

An important reason for opposition is that "this will lead to the dumping of Nordic goods to the colonies, which will seriously damage the strength of the country's industry."

So, here comes the problem.

Why did a group of sugar sellers, or in other words, a bill that was nominally the core of the Molasses Act, object to it on the grounds that "it will lead to the dumping of Nordic goods to the colonies and damage the domestic industry"?

In other words, what products are there in Northern Europe that can be dumped on the colonies?

Is it a Nordic product?

Or the Oriental goods of the Swedish East India Company and the Danish East India Company?

Because everyone is a thousand-year-old fox, so don’t play nonsense. You go directly to the European continent to sell goods, and when you come back, you come back with an empty ship?

Southern Europe does have mediocre handicraft capabilities. Not to mention, you can't buy much goods there.

But what about Northern Europe?

Historically, the East India Company of Sweden and Denmark had nothing to do with India. So where were the Chinese tea, cotton, silk, and porcelain sold in such a small country, ship after ship after ship?

In 1739, before the final review of a series of bills such as the Molasses Act, the most intense opposition came from councilors from handicraft cities that had little to do with sugar and wine.

And bringing Ireland into the scope of the direct trade with the West Indies also started the era of smuggling in Ireland.

The problem is, the palms and backs of the hands are all flesh.

The capital power of the West India, the capital power of the East India, and the capital power of the domestic handicraft industry - these also need to be taken apart. For example, the British silk weaving industry also wanted cheap, non-monopolized products by the East India Company, and high-end products. such as Indian silk or Chinese silk; and such as wool textile industry, etc. They are dissatisfied with the East India Company's sale of cotton cloth. Even if it imposes extremely high tariffs, it should be banned directly. The cotton textile industry hopes that the government will relax the ban on cotton cloth, but it also prohibits the entry of foreign cotton cloth. But the problem is Lifting the ban on cotton cloth will not stop the smuggling of foreign cotton cloth at all...

The country cannot simply be personified.

The game surrounding the British Parliament is an overt and covert struggle between various capital forces, and the interests of each other are often contradictory.

This is not even a simple matter of business capital.

Within commercial capital, there are subdivisions.

There is also a contradiction between the East India Company, which has monopoly privileges, and the West Indian capital, which does not have the right to trade Eastern goods but can obtain goods from Northern Europe.

There is no obstacle between West Indian capital and China - no matter how great your Chinese handicraft industry is, can you sell sugar over there? I'll pay you to death.

But tea and other things are not produced in the West Indies, so why should the East India Company make all the money? You can boldly ship goods to Sweden. When I sell sugar here, I will not return with an empty ship.

If we personify Britain, can this contradiction be resolved?

Yes, in theory, as long as the degree of industrial revolution reaches the threshold, and the East India Company ships are cheap and good quality cotton and raw silk instead of cotton cloth and silk, this contradiction can be resolved.

But now, let's be pragmatic... The Manchester Act has been in effect for so long. Can the quality and efficiency of Lancashire's cotton cloth be compared with Bombay Surat? No, and it may not be possible in a short time.

Originally, the Swedish East India Company was undercapitalized and the Danish East India Company had limited shipping capacity. Even so, it still caused serious smuggling problems. Now Dashun is cooperating with Sweden and the Netherlands, and a large number of goods have gone to Northern Europe. With sufficient capital, guaranteed supply, clear tariffs, and increased shipping capacity, the problem is even greater.

So, this is what Liu Yu said, and it is also what some sober people in the East India Company have realized.

There is not much time left for the East India Company.

They had to go all out and invest in India.

It was too difficult for them to compromise and cooperate with Dashun, because their real profits came from the monopoly privileges in the country. What Dashun wanted was to abolish their monopoly privileges and to...free trade.

With free trade, British commercial capital could act as a comprador.

But with free trade, the British East India Company would die.

So if the domestic industrial production capacity is insufficient, and it can be foreseen that this reality will continue for decades, then the best way is to borrow India's higher manual efficiency and cheaper labor costs to replace and compete with China's handicraft production capacity.

This is the most feasible and practical way besides the unrealistic fantasy of choosing a full-scale war, slaughtering all the southeast coast of Dashun, and completely destroying Dashun's fleet.

As long as Indian products are cheap enough, of good quality, and have sufficient production capacity, no one will use Chinese products, and the East India Company will still control the benefits of the monopoly.

Otherwise, the group of people in West India will sell Britain for a good price.

Even from the perspective of the personification of Britain, the significance of the East India Company is huge. Because if there is no East India Company, the remaining commercial capital will quickly gather into a comprador group and get closer to Dashun.

To a certain extent, the East India Company is also Britain's way of mixing sand with commercial capital, although they may not realize it themselves.

This is the significance of granting monopoly privileges, forcing the capital of the East India Company to stand on the opposite side of Chinese commercial capital.

Without this monopoly privilege, British commercial capital, West Indian capital group, and North American colonial group will immediately cooperate with Dashun's commercial capital to sell British industrial capital, sell British tariffs, and sell the huge colonial market at a price that satisfies them.

And because of this monopoly privilege, the East India Company can only choose to be an enemy of Chinese commercial capital and try to increase investment in India to try to get rid of its dependence on Chinese goods.

And this forced the capital group of the East India Company to choose to fully control Bengal and quickly defeat the power of France in India, so as to use the most brutal robbery system to reduce costs and ensure that Rajshahi silk can compete with Songsu silk and Bengal cotton cloth can compete with Songsu cotton cloth.

In a more metaphysical and fatalistic way, the British slave trade and Caribbean sugar development after the Treaty of Utrecht led to the Batavia sugar crisis, which eventually led to the Chinese migration to Ceylon.

Now, they are forced to take ruthless action against France. The faster they act, the faster their crisis will come. Although they realize that the time left for the East India Company is running out, they do not realize that the reason why Dashun has been slow to act in India is precisely because they think that the French are an obstacle.