of America for the general interest of all nations.”
The price he was prepared to offer these powers for
their adhesion was to be a share in the colonial commerce
of England, and the acquisition of some of the French
and Spanish colonial dependencies for themselves.
Sinclair sent his pamphlet to Smith, apparently with
a request for his opinion on the advisability of translating
it for the conversion of the powers, and he received
the following reply. I may add that I have not
been able to see this pamphlet, but that it is evidently
not the pamphlet entitled “Impartial Considerations
on the Propriety of retaining Gibraltar,” as
Sinclair’s biographer supposes; for in the former
pamphlet Sinclair is advocating not only a continuance,
but an extension of the war, whereas in the latter
he has come round to the advocacy of peace, and instead
of contemplating the deprivation of France and Spain
of their colonies, he recommends the cession of Gibraltar
as a useless and expensive possession, using very much
the same line of argument which Smith suggests in
this letter. Smith’s letter very probably
had some influence in changing his views, though it
is true the idea of ceding Gibraltar was in 1782 much
favoured by a party in Lord Shelburne’s government,
and even by the king himself.
Smith’s letter ran thus:—
MY DEAR SIR—I have read your pamphlet several times 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 these 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 forces, to the general defence of the empire, and very little even to their own particular defence, is, I think, the subject on 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