New Shun 1730

The North American group has changed from "singing high-sounding slogans" to "talking about interests", which is directly related to the core interests of Dashun.

Because of the differences in productivity levels and handicraft capabilities, the focus of the post-war negotiations of this "First World War" is fundamentally different between European countries and Dashun.

For example, the focus of Britain, France, Spain, etc. is still around Barbados, Minorca, Jamaica, Hanover and Britain's separation, lowlands, etc.

Dashun's focus is on free trade, the Netherlands' complete becoming the European customs for trade, and the issue of North American demarcation.

If Dashun wants to drag it out like this, the war in Europe can actually be considered over.

Up to now, Berlin has been captured by the Russian army, a sailor uprising broke out in Britain this year demanding the improvement of sailor treatment, and the debate in France about reform and legal gentry preferential treatment can also be exempted from the purchase of nobles is rampant.

There was even a debate on the "conscription law" in France. For example, Dashun needed to repair the Yellow River. Although France did not have the Yellow River to repair, it could not dig canals in France, so it could only build roads. Therefore, France had road construction labor. Should this road construction labor be changed? What should it be changed to? Can rich people pay to be exempted from service? And so on, and so on. The tax law debate reached this point, and the crisis had actually reached an uncontrollable level.

Now there is nothing to fight, and both sides are basically unable to fight.

Then the dawn of peace has emerged, but Liu Yu is busy deepening some memories for the dawn of peace. Strive to upgrade anti-defeat to anti-aggression. Even if it cannot be achieved, it must reach the level of anti-war reflection.

Naturally, this kind of "education" is carried out by physical means, such as the Acadians' revenge action that is being supported.

This second Philadelphia Conference in North America may not be a big deal from the European perspective of the entire "First World War". But for Dashun, this is a big deal second only to the free trade of the Netherlands as a port.

This time, the British side also sent people.

The person who came was Benjamin Franklin, the Postmaster General of North America. After all, it was not convenient for the British side to send people directly to participate in this improper meeting.

In return, Lord Bute, who was already the Prime Minister, gave Franklin's illegitimate son, William Franklin, the position of "Governor of New Jersey".

There is nothing shameful about this. Historically, Franklin went to Lord Bute, hoping to find a governor's job for his illegitimate son who had already been recognized.

It's normal.

As a royalist, Lord Bute was also happy to see the struggle between the "new landlords" and "old landlords" in Pennsylvania, and readily agreed.

Of course, due to the different cultural environment, the factions in Pennsylvania in history were not called "new landlords" and "old landlords".

Instead, they were called "anti-patent land faction" and "pro-patent land faction".

But in fact, it was a group of new landlords who opposed the "early arrivals" headed by the Penn family, hoping to nationalize the land in Pennsylvania from private ownership.

Historically, Franklin was also driven out by the Pennsylvania Parliament for this reason, and even lost his position in the State Parliament.

However, now, Lord Bute took advantage of the chaos and the royalist faction completely occupied the parliament. Now, of course, he gave Franklin great support. He was the Postmaster General of North America and his son was the Governor of New Jersey in return, just to let Franklin coordinate.

Because, after Dashun proposed the prescription of "shock" and "free trade", the British royalist party had to hold North America tightly.

It's impossible... It's impossible to arrest tens of thousands of unemployed craftsmen in Manchester and other places and throw them all to Sugar Island as prison slaves.

If large tracts of land in Pennsylvania can be nationalized, it will definitely greatly ease the huge internal contradictions that are about to erupt in Britain.

The 120,000 square kilometers of land owned by the Penn family are not all arable land. What if it were 120,000 square kilometers of arable land? It means that the Penn family has feudal sovereignty over these 120,000 square kilometers of land, which means that when "granting land", generally one-third of the feudal privilege exemption tax must be paid - similar to the right of night, of course, Pennsylvania does not have it, but there is something similar. In other words, you actually have to pay two cents for land: one is the money you pay to buy the land for cultivation, and the other is the money you pay to buy out the feudal rights of the landlord. For example, you buy the right to cultivate the land, but the landlord has the right to hunt on the land. Again, the landlord may not really go hunting in your wheat field, but based on procedural justice and legal justice, you have to pay this money to the landlord to buy out the landlord's hunting rights on the land.

In other words, it is even simpler. According to European tradition, the so-called purchase of land is actually the "perpetual tenancy right". From the perspective of European law, the perpetual tenancy right is a matter of planting and harvesting. Then the right to harvest and hunt attached to the land are not included in the perpetual tenancy. It is okay for you to farm, because you have bought the perpetual tenancy rights to cultivate and harvest; similarly, it is okay for me to hunt on your land, because I have not sold you the right to hunt on this land.

This is completely different from the situation in Dashun. The tenants in Dashun "enjoy" the super-economic exploitation under the private ownership of land; while the farmers in Europe still "enjoy" the land ownership extended by the genuine feudal aristocracy.

The problem of Pennsylvania can either rely on the king to take back the sovereignty of Pennsylvania; or it can only follow the historical line. When the gunshots in Lexington rang out, the Penn family, as a "royalist party", downplayed its class attributes and confiscated its land.

If we remove the political attributes of "land reform" and only look at it from a purely "technical" perspective. North America is the place where "land reform" is most thorough on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean, but the "land reform" in North America uses the "scalps" of Indians; it uses the property of hundreds and thousands of "royalists" who have diluted their class attributes and strengthened their team status.

So, if we label the big landlords as "royalists" and then confiscate their land, is it not "fighting the landlord"?

It depends on how you say it.

From the perspective of appearance, it is not: for example, John Bin, his property and land were not confiscated because he was a landlord; he was fought against because he was a "royalist", and the confiscated land was nationalized. From the perspective of law and procedure, this is not fighting the landlord.

From the perspective of essence, it is. For example, John Bin is a standard "fighting the landlord" - he can't even be considered as buying land reform.

This is the problem.

If the "anti-patent land" faction represented by Franklin wins, then the land of Pennsylvania will become a royal colony.

And the king can be exempted from the "refund" for purchasing land. In other words, he only needs to pay one cent for the land, and does not need to pay a second part to the landlord.

The situation here stems from the particularity of North America.

The British did not want to implement the tenant farming system in North America at the beginning. But in the North American environment, to put it bluntly, which tenant is willing to rent land for you?

For example, in the northern Jiangsu area of ​​Dashun, the tenants said, "If you don't rent land, there are plenty of people who rent land. You can do it if you want. If you don't want to do it, get out." In North America, it is, "I don't rent land, there are plenty of places to cultivate."

This is determined by material conditions, so the orthodox tenant farming system cannot be implemented here at all, at least not now. There are too few people and too much land.

Even if the king does not exempt the "refund", the land of the Penn family and the perpetual tenants on the Penn family's land in theory - in fact, self-cultivating farmers - will have to pay taxes.

Now, because of the issue of land ownership, the Pennsylvania State Assembly is penniless, because the Penn family and its affiliated self-cultivating farmers do not pay taxes.

Franklin's original intention of going to London this time was to hope that the Penn family would pay taxes every year.

After all, without taxes, nothing can be done. Even if there is no external expansion, building a road or a bridge requires financial resources, right?

This matter is essentially the same as the "serving" and "guiling" of the former Ming Dynasty.

It is nothing more than taking the land to rely on the big landlord, or the big landlord is so big that the people under him are already relying on the big landlord.

They all use their tax exemption rights, whether it comes from the law or the sovereignty of the land, to exempt from paying land taxes.

Franklin and others represented the new landlords who got on board later; those in Pennsylvania got on board first and enclosed the land first.

From the logic of capitalism, it is impossible to understand what Pennsylvania was at this time.

But if we use the logic of the feudal Middle Ages, it is very easy to understand what it was.

This is a medieval [County palatine], Palatine County, or Palatine County.

The nobles declared their allegiance to the king, but they were not vassals of the king. In their territory, the king's power was exercised.

Unlike those nobles under the king's power who said "I am your vassal, but my vassal is not your vassal", they are more like "military generals" who listen to orders but not to announcements.

To put it simply, this [County palatine] is not the eight hundred princes of Jin, Chu, Qi and Wei under the early Zhou emperor. In the early days, Jin, Chu, Qi and Wei were standard I am your vassal, but my vassal is not your vassal.

[County palatine] is more similar to the tributary states of Korea, Vietnam, Ryukyu, etc. before Dashun. The emperor's words are effective, but not so effective.

Lancaster, Durham, and Sudberg in England are all in this form in legal terms.

So if we follow European legal principles, Korea and Ryukyu are to Dashun, similar to the Duchy of Lancaster to England.

Therefore, the issue of Pennsylvania is quite complicated. It is not just a land issue, but also involves many legal principles.

It is basically the mainstream thought of the whole of Europe in the 18th century - the expansion of centralization and the extension of the court's authority, turning all the legal [County palatine] that "listen to orders but not to announcements" into subordinate provinces.

It should be noted that Franklin's demands are not consistent with the ideas of the British government. The two sides are now only on the same path for a short time in fighting against the Penn family and the old forces.

Franklin's demand is to continue to maintain Pennsylvania as a [County palatine], but the sovereignty of Pennsylvania should belong to the Pennsylvania Parliament. The Parliament will replace the Penn family as the subject of "listening to orders but not to announcements".

The British government's idea is to turn Pennsylvania from a Palatine County into a normal county under the king's power, making it the same as the counties in the British mainland, and eliminating its excessive independence.

Franklin's demand is that North America and England have equal status. Two parliaments, one in North America and one in the British Isles, two teams, and one king.

The British government's demand, or the demand of the parliamentary faction in Britain, is one parliament, the only parliament in London, which has full sovereignty, and North America can enter the London parliament according to the designated seats.

Originally, this was an irreconcilable contradiction. All fools know that if you play this way, the British Parliament will never allow this group of North Americans to become a majority. By that time, Congress passed a law stating that land tax would be levied in North America as if it were on the mainland. This even eliminated the slogan "No representation, no tax."

However, with Dashun's participation in the war, it can be said to be a model of treating internal diseases externally.

After the King of England summoned Franklin last year, he directly said: North America is a money-losing product, and the UK does not want to subsidize it. Come and see for yourselves.

As the French in the north began to fight back, the Acadians began to take revenge, and Dashun began to attack the southern plantations, North America needed to beg the British not to give up on them, and hoped that the British would continue to send troops to protect them.

Because only if France is expelled from Canada will the contradiction between the United States and France cease to exist.

Now, what North America is afraid of is that if Britain is defeated and France forces Britain to allow the thirteen North American states to separate, and then destroys the thirteen states that have nothing to do with Britain, then they will cry.

What's even more frightening is that from a geographical perspective, the UK is likely to agree. Because this means letting North America bleed the French, and at the same time strengthen North America's centripetal force, why not?

After Dashun made the demand for free trade, times have of course changed. The composition of British finance will undergo huge changes, and the value of North America as a "tariff" will greatly increase.

However, not everyone can understand the words "times have changed".

Many people still continue to think about the current situation along the lines of the past British mercantilism era, and it is natural that they make wrong judgments and unfounded worries. In the era of mercantilism, New England was a money-losing commodity that could not be more standard.

This "time has changed", in the UK, reflected in the British manufacturing industry and the power of the budding industrial capital, which was killed by Dashun.

British commercial capital and the severely damaged financial industry finally got rid of the dilemma of the two tax laws and prohibition orders in 1721 and 1733: if they want to increase imports, there are always people who talk about manufacturing, and some people talk about the local poor. Talking about manufacturing, especially the textile industry, has given many poor people in the country something to do.

It's better now. The forces that made commercial capital and the financial industry quite unhappy at the beginning have been beaten to death by Dashun. Those who clamored to develop manufacturing and give the poor in the country something to do now have little power.

The East India Company was dead.

However, the East India Company's original demands - to expand imports, reduce tariffs, and lift the ban on foreign goods - were realized.

The East India Company is dead, but the shareholders of the East India Company are not dead. This is a limited liability company. If the company should go bankrupt, is it possible for the shareholders to pay back with their own money?

This "era has changed", in North America, it is reflected in the fact that North America's big businessmen and slave owners have obtained what they dreamed of through completely bloodless methods.

Stephen Hopkins, the founding father of North America and one of the signers of the Declaration, once said very soberly and calmly in history: "Our freedom will be a cheap deal, and only 100,000 lives will be lost." That’s all].

Now, even cheaper.

It didn’t even take 100,000 people to achieve Stephen Hopkins’s economic demands: liberalize imports.