Philadelphia*S Commercial £Xpansion, 1720-1739

Philadelphia*s Commercial £xpansion, 1720-1739

HILE a number of historians have concerned themselves with the growth of the colonial economy in general, and W some with the development of the economy of the Dela- ware Bay area specifically, few have attempted to grapple with one of the more significant sources of information available, the custom house statistics. In the past decade or so, the Philadelphia news- papers have been collected and microfilmed, thus providing almost a complete series of custom house reports from 1720 on. Through them, the city's trade can be examined in detail. While the newspaper listings of these reports are not minutely accurate, they do expose the patterns and fluctuations of Philadelphia's trade. This article, covering the twenty years 1720-1739, demonstrates the uses to which such material may be put and at the same time supports the thesis that the period after 1720 was one of very marked economic growth, at least for Pennsylvania.1 During those years, Philadelphia experienced a significant trade expansion which aroused the envy, if not the jealousy, of neighboring colonials.2 The city possessed the prime requisites for an expanding seaport, a productive hinterland, a safe, deep anchorage, and a merchant community characterized by industry and initiative. It was a period in which the population of Pennsylvania increased from about 31,000 to more than 85,000/ with the rate of growth in the agricul-

1 George R. Taylor, "American Economic Growth before 1840: An Exploratory Essay," Journal of Economic History, XXIV (1964), 427-444. For studies on Pennsylvania's economy in this era see Anne Bezanson, Robert D. Gra^and Miriam Hussey, Prices in Colonial Penn- sylvania (Philadelphia, 1935); Mary A. Hanna, Tradej)f the "Delaware "District before the Revolu- tion (Northampton, Mass., 1917); Arthur L. Jensen, The Maritime Commerce of Philadelphia (Madison, Wis., 1963); Richard A. Lester, Monetary Experiments, Early American and Recent Scandinavian (Princeton, 1939). 2 New England Weekly Journal, July 21, 1735; Aug. 11, 1735. 3 Stuart Bruchey, ed., The Colonial Merchant: Sources and Readings (New York, 1966), 11-12. Philadelphia's population in 1720 was 10,000 and in 1743 only 13,000. 401 4O2 JAMES G. LYDON October tural sections of the colony exceeding that of the city. The production of agricultural staples, upon which the city's economy was based, rose steadily with the influx of agricultural workers. These, in turn, created an additional demand for finished products. Thus, the expansion of the colony's economy put heavy pressure on its credit facilities and resulted in a search for new trading outlets. Pennsylvania's prosperity depended heavily on the demand of foreign markets for wheat, flour, and bread. References to wheat production are common in mercantile correspondence: of the 1728 crop, "the best ever"; of that in 1730, "the greatest crop that ever was raised in Pennsylvania"; of the 1738 harvest, "the largest Crop of Wheat this Year that was ever known here."4 With the exception, of 1729, when the crop was off by a third, this was a period of fine weather and good harvests. A few export statistics are available. EXPORTS OF WHEAT, FLOUR, AND BREAD5 Wheat {bushels) Flour {barrels) Bread {casks) 1729 74,809 35,438 9,730 1730 38,643 38,570 9,622 1731 53,320 56,639 12,436 1734-1735 195,028 37,997 8,647 By the mid-thirties, annual exports of these commodities probably approached £50,000 in value. Production of other goods, especially iron and flaxseed, showed the same rapid increase. Statistics on the city's trade reflect its production growth.

PHILADELPHIA TRADE STATISTICS, 1720-17396 ENTRANCES CLEARANCES Vessels Tonnage Vessels Tonnage 1720 122 3,820 127 4,210 1721 130 4,010 136 3,850 1722 97 3,240 no 3,77o 1723 79 3,070 86 3,49O

4 Samuel Powel, Jr., to John Simpson, Aug. 6,1728; to Thomas Hyam, Oct. 15,1730, June 25, 1734, Samuel Powel, Jr., Letter Book, Historical Society of Pennsylvania (HSP). John Reynell to Nathaniel Cooper, Oct. 9, 1738, John Reynell Letter Book, HSP. See also Bezan- son, 12-29. 5 Hanna, 250; Pennsylvania Gazette, Mar. 27, 1735. 6 Commercial statistics, unless otherwise noted, are from the weekly shipping records in the American Weekly Mercury for 1720-1728, and the Pennsylvania Gazette for 1729-1739. Ber- 1967 PHILADELPHIA S COMMERCIACOMI L EXPANSION 4O3 PHILADELPHIADELPHIA TRADE STASTATISTICS1 , 1720-1739 (Continued)

ENTRANCES CLEARANCES Vessels Tonnage Vessels Tonnage 1724 104 3,870 103 4,130 1725 106 4,250 117 4,840 1726 132 5,77o 141 6,400 1727 no 4,55O 128 5,180 1728 142 6,040 140 5,73O 1729 149 6,710 160 7,540 1730 157 6,670 171 7,760 1731 178 7,680 187 8,770 1732 146 6,960 137 6,350 1733 182 8,140 220 10,270 1734 210 9,38o *3S 11,100 1735 193 9,060 207 9,920 1736 213 9,94° 224 10,140 1737 222 10,030 238 10,450 1738 204 8,900 217 9,890 1739 209 9,560 236 10,980 Following the impact of the South Sea Bubble crisis of 1721, the colony's trade recovered rapidly, with the major expansion occurring after 1728. The number of vessels using the port increased steadily, with the tonnage employed rising sharply. The capacity of the aver- age vessel entering the port in the early 1720^ was probably about thirty tons; by the close of the period it had risen nearly a third. The immigrant traffic especially employed larger vessels. In the early twenties, more than forty-five per cent of the port's tonnage came and went in sloops and schooners, but in the next decade their share of the traffic declined to slightly more than fifteen per cent. The smaller cargo carriers were more and more confined to the coastal trades and to voyages to the West Indies. Brigs and snows were now efficiently employed in all of the port's trading areas, and the number of vessels classified as ships also rose sharply. muda and the Bahamas are included in the West Indies; the Channel Islands are included with England. Tonnage figures are estimates based on those in the Pennsylvania Ship Registries for this period. Sloops and schooners averaged twenty tons; brigs, snows, pinks, and billenders, fifty tons; and ships, ninety tons. Shallops and boats rate at ten tons. These figures are on the low side. Pennsylvania Archives (Eighth Series), III, 1795, gives clearance figures for 1720- 1725, as follows: 1720, 3,982 tons; 1721, 3,711 tons; 1722, 3,531 tons; 1723, 3,942 tons; 1724, 5,450 tons; 1725, 6y6$$ tons. They demonstrate that my figures are on the low side, yet, as a physical index of trade my figures do have some relevance. 404 JAMES G. LYDON October By combining the entrances and clearances of individual vessels, a breakdown of the number and types of vessels engaged in the various trades can be attained. VESSELS EMPLOYED IN PHILADELPHIA'S TRADE Trade Ship Brig Snow Sloop Other Vessels Tons 1724-25 West Indies 11 12 1 44 — 68 2,520 1735-36 9 15 6 35 4 69 2,640 1724-25 British 9 4 2 — — 15 I,O5O 1735-36 Isles 18 13 7 38 2,62O 1724-25 Southern 2 3 — 5 33O 1735-36 Europe 7 4 2 2 15 97O 1724-25 Coastal 1 23 1 4 29 650 1735-36 2 4 2 44 15 67 I,66O 1724-25 Mixed 15 4 5 15 39 2,IOO 1735-36 Voyages 34 17 12 9 3 I 76 4,8OO 7 1724-25 Totals 38 20 9 84 1 4 156 6,650 1735-36 70 S3 29 92 22 I 267 12,730 1724-25 Regularly 8 7 1 1 — 47 I,74O O N

1735-36 Employed 27 29 8 G o C 8 108 5,l6o 1724-25 Layover 67 41 67 34 S6 1735-36 Time (Days) 60 49 42 29 27 Down to the thirties, the city possessed only one major outlet, the West Indies, and one minor trading area, the British Isles. By the middle of that decade, the British Isles had become a major trade sector and trade with Southern Europe and coastal North America had advanced markedly. With more markets open, more diversity in trading patterns was possible and larger vessels could be employed more profitably. Many vessels entered and cleared only once, and thus the vessels regularly employed, and presumably owned in Philadelphia, were far fewer in number than might be expected. The various trades involved differing periods of time for round-trip cruises: a West Indian voyage took about four months; to Southern Europe about six months; to Britain about nine months; to coastal ports a month or two. The increasing proportion of larger vessels regularly employed emphasizes the greater availability of goods at the port, and, in consequence, shorter layovers. This made trading at Philadelphia a bit more profitable for shippers.

7 A few vessels traded to and from Newfoundland and have not been included except in the totals. 1967 PHILADELPHIA'S COMMERCIAL EXPANSION 405 The large number of vessels making a single voyage to and from Philadelphia, and the fact that about half of them were from the British Isles in both periods, suggests the continued influence of British merchants. While the amount of Philadelphia-based shipping increased as capital was amassed, the city's merchants still depended heavily on their consignment business, and much of the shipping was probably still British owned. As the demand for cargo space increased, local shipbuilding increased to the profit of the shipwrights. Over these twenty years, 235 vessels (13,120 tons) cleared the port without entering. Twice as much shipping was built in 1726 as in any year before 1723, and statistics for six years and part of a seventh indicate that 194 ocean- going vessels (9,261 tons) were built along the Delaware.8 A considerable part of this new tonnage was owned outside the colony, with large carriers being built when the bulk of their cost came from outside sources. The new tonnage launched, added to the extra cargo space provided by the immigrant trades, suggests that, despite the increase in staple production, freight rates were probably relatively stable in these years. Philadelphia expanded its trade in all areas during this period, but in some sectors the growth was much greater than in others. For example, entrances from the British Isles increased by two and a half times, and clearances for the British Isles more than quadrupled. This area cannot, however, be treated as a single entity since it included several streams of trade.

ENTRANCES FROM THE BRITISH ISLES, 1720-1739 German Im- England Ireland Scotland Totals British9 migration™ Fes. Tons Fes. Tons Fes. Tons Fes. Tons Imports Fes. People 1720 14 1,140 2 140 - — 16 1,280 £24,531 2 240 1721 17 1,150 2 140 — 19 1,290 21,548 5 140 1722 14 1,070 1 90 1 90 16 1,250 26,397 3 25°

8 Ship Register Books of the Province of Pennsylvania, Nos. 2, 4, 7, 8, HSP; Penn- sylvania Archives (Eighth Series), III, 1795, 1829. 9 Charles Whitworth, The State of the Trade of Great Britain (London, 1776), 67. The limitations of Whitworth's statistics are well known. They can, however, be employed with some profit as a physical index of trade. 10 Ralph Beaver Strassburger, William J. Hinke, ed., Pennsylvania German Pioneers (Penn- sylvania German Society Proceedings, XLII), I, 31-275. Additional references to immigrant numbers may be found in the American Weekly Mercury', New England Weekly Iournaly Pennsylvania Gazette, especially for the period pre-1727. JAMES G. LYDON Octobe

ENTRANCES FROM THE: BRITISH ISLES, 1720-1739 {Continued) German Im- England Ireland Scotland Totals British migration Fes. Tons Fes. Tons Fes. Tons Fes. Tons Imports Fes. People 1723 9 690 3 270 - — 12 960 15,992 2 — 1724 13 910 2 140 - — 15 1,050 30,324 3 — 1725 21 1,440 3 230 - — 24 1,670 42,209 2 — 1726 28 2,070 5 33O 1 90 34 2,490 37,634 3 — 1727 17 i>370 1 5O - — 18 1,420 3i,979 5 1,240 1728 25 1,970 6 420 1 90 32 2,480 37,478 3 39O 1729 24 1,670 15 1,110 1 90 40 2,870 29,799 2 306 1730 16 1,290 4 320 1 5O 21 1,660 48,592 3 442 1731 19 M3O 4 280 - — 23 1,710 44,260 4 932 1732 22 i,75o 6 380 2 140 3O 2,270 41,698 11 1,821 1733 17 1,290 8 520 2 140 27 i,95o 40,565 6 1,028 1734 23 1,480 11 690 1 5O 35 2,220 54,392 1 261 1735 22 1,440 14 1,070 1 90 37 2,600 48,804 1 176 1736 26 1,940 30 1,960 1 5O 57 3,950 6i,5i3 3 818 1737 23 1,910 13 750 1 5O 37 2,710 56,690 7 1,540 1738 25 i>93° 8 480 - — 33 2,410 61,450 16 2,504 1739 28 2,280 8 37O 1 5o 31 2,700 54,452 8 578 Of the vessels arriving from English ports, 259 cleared from London or Bristol, with the latter port losing a slight early lead in the late twenties; seventy-nine vessels carrying German immigrants made only the required clearances through Channel ports; the re- mainder, sixty-five vessels, entered from the smaller English ports. The majority of the tonnage from England carried the finished products so in demand in America, as well as a few score immigrants yearly. Charles Whitworth's statistics on exports to Pennsylvania, which provide a physical index on the flow of finished goods, reflect the effect of a rapidly expanding population and an increasingly affluent society. They show an increase of about 240 per cent, as compared to a population growth of 175 per cent, though the expanding coastal trade doubtless played a part here. The impact of immigration is especially evident in the thirties. The specie which the new arrivals brought with them promoted the market for English goods. Early in 1739, ^e Pennsylvania Assembly ascribed the flourishing condition of the colony to its German immigrants.11 More than a fifth of the vessels coming in from English ports carried German passengers, and thus this traffic offered important employment to English

11 Pennsylvania Gazette, Jan. u, 1739. 1967 PHILADELPHIA'S COMMERCIAL EXPANSION 407 shipping. Most of the immigrant carriers were English owned. Load- ing their human cargoes at Rotterdam, they then cleared at a Chan- nel port for Philadelphia. Cowes in the Isle of Wight evidently possessed special attractions, for twenty-nine of these vessels cleared customs there.12 Various sources indicate that more than 12,666 Germans immi- grated to Philadelphia in these years. Yet, information on well over a third of the vessels arriving is incomplete. A more realistic estimate of the number of their passengers would be 18,500, with almost three times as many coming in the thirties as in the previous decade. When 2,000 people left the Rhineland in 1732, 1,821 of them were headed for Philadelphia, an indication of its popularity for immigrants. While lesser peaks in immigration reflect the international tensions of the twenties, the threat of the War of the Polish Succession accounts for the rush to America in the next decade. This short war interrupted the flow temporarily, but peace and an abnormally low vintage in the mid-thirties saw the peak reached in 1738. Limited figures on the sixteen vessels arriving that year indicate that they carried more than 2,504 passengers.13 The threat of an Anglo-Spanish war the following year brought a sharp decline, yet the third largest number of immigrant vessels arrived that year. Entrances from the British Isles also disclose Irish immigration. Ireland was threatened by famine in these years. In 1722, the English shipped wheat to Irish ports to alleviate "the great Scarcity there," and major famines struck in 1729 and again in the mid-thirties.14 Again, immigration was much heavier in the second decade of this period with twenty vessels loading passengers in Irish ports in the summer of I736.16 Specific figures on this immigration are lacking. Certainly the 146 vessels arriving from Irish ports did not carry solely immigrants. Irish linens and other goods were sold in the 12 Others cleared at Dover (19), Plymouth (15), and Deal (14). 13 Boston Newsletter, Sept. 28, 1732; New England Weekly Journal, Mar. 30, 1730; Nov. 4, 1734; July 7, 1735; Dec. 19, 1738. Strassburger's lists and newspaper references provide figures for seven of the sixteen vessels bringing Germans in 1738. See New England Weekly Journal, Sept. 26, 1738; Nov. 7, 1738; Dec. 19, 1738. 14 American Weekly Mercury, Nov. 23, 1722; New England Weekly Journal, Aug. 18, 1729; Dec. 22,1729; Mar. 30,1730; Sept. 23, 1735; Sept. 28,1736. This newspaper on Sept. 21,1736, reported a thousand immigrant arrivals at Newcastle on one day, mainly Irish. 15 See "Obstructions to Irish Immigration to Pennsylvania, 1736," Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, XXI (1897), 485-487. 408 JAMES G. LYDON October colony. But, compared to the ninety German immigrant carriers, it seems plausible to suggest that the Irish migration matched that from Germany.16 The distribution of entrances from Irish ports indicates that immigration from Southern Ireland (eighty-seven vessels) was greater than that from the North (fifty-three vessels). Dublin alone, with sixty-one clearances, sent more than the whole of the North combined. While corn riots reported in Dublin in 1729 support the theory of large numbers of southern Irish immigrating, vessels from English ports often stopped at Cork or Dublin on the way to America because provisions were cheaper there.17 When combined with newspaper reports, captains' lists, lists of those swearing allegiance, and other records, the shipping statistics allow the demographer a measure to apply to immigration figures. In these twenty years, perhaps 41,000 reached the colony. Thomas Lowndes doubtless exaggerated in 1728, when he estimated that every German who came to Pennsylvania brought £50 sterling with him. But, if each new arrival brought only £3 in this period, the influx of specie was considerable.18 Shipping bound to England did not approach in volume that arriving from there, the overage amounting to an estimated 14,000 tons of cargo space. The two major English ports, London and Bristol, attracted the bulk of the shipping bound home. When Irish wheat prices were high and supplies in England limited, as in 1729, wheat cargoes cleared through Milford or Bristol and then went on to Dublin or Cork. Whitworth's statistics, even when employed as a physical index, provide few clues for an understanding of trade home- ward. While returns rose through these years, they fluctuated sharply.19 The sudden blossoming of a trade to Ireland, beginning in 1731, resulted from the withdrawal of restrictions by Parliament on non-

16 Pennsylvania Gazette, Aug. 19, 1731; Boston Newsletter, Aug. 31, 1732. 17 New England Weekly Journal, June 31,1729. Dublin alone cleared 61 vessels to Philadel- phia, more than Londonderry (24), Belfast (16), and Carrickfergus (10) combined. 18 Scottish immigration was small. See ibid., Mar. 30, 1730; Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, XXXVI, 192 (cited hence as CSPC). 19 Whitworth, 67; United States Department of Commerce, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1951 (Washington, D. C, i960), 762, 763, 765. CSPC, XLI, 348, indicates increased exports of pitch and tar in the mid-thirties. 1967 PHILADELPHIA S COMMERCIAL EXPANSION 4O9 enumerated products. In all but two of the nine years, 1731-1739, clearances to Ireland exceeded those to England and the over-all balance was heavily in favor of this new outlet. Lumber products, flaxseed, wheat, flour, and rum went there in large amounts.

CLEARANCES TO THE BRITISH ISLES, 1720-1739 England Ireland Scotland Totals Exports to Fes. Tons Ves. Tons Ves. Tons Ves. Tons Englam 1720 7 520 — — - — 7 520 £7,928 1721 11 650 — — 1 90 12 740 8,037 1722 7 560 — — - 7 560 6,882 1723 5 450 — — - — 5 450 %,33* 1724 4 290 2 140 - — 6 43o 4,O57 1725 9 690 — — - — 9 690 11,981 1726 14 990 — — - — 14 990 5,960 1727 9 730 1 - — 10 780 12,823 1728 13 950 — — 3 200 16 1,250 15,230 1729 20 1,300 — — 4 280 24 1,580 7,434 1730 12 880 — — 5 290 17 1,170 10,582 1731 17 1,210 4 240 2 100 23 i,55o 12,786 1732 9 570 9 620 1 50 l9 1,240 8,524 1733 13 890 20 1,440 - — 33 2,330 H,776 1734 22 1,400 23 1,460 - — 45 2,860 20,217 1735 15 1,040 18 1,180 1 50 34 2,270 21,919 1736 IO 740 28 1,690 1 50 29 2,480 20,786 1737 14 1,060 14 870 1 50 29 1,980 15,198 1738 IO 780 17 1,060 - — 27 1,840 11,918 1739 7 470 24 1,450 2 100 3i 2,020 8,134 By the middle thirties, the Irish trade had become almost as size- able as that to the West Indies fifteen years before. At times, barrel staves and planks were in short supply because the Irish trade was "pretty much fell into."20 By 1737, the flaxseed exports were "grown A very considerable Branch of Trade." Where only 2,000 bushels were exported in 1729, some 9,000 bushels went out in 1734-1735 and 40,000 bushels in 1739.21 Dublin (ninety-two vessels) and Cork

20 Francis G. James, "Irish Colonial Trade in the Eighteenth Century," William and Mary Quarterly (Third Series) XX, (1963), 574-584; Reynell to Robert Stevenson, July 25,1732, to Daniel Flexney, June 2,1737, to M. L. Dicker, Nov. 1,1737, Reynell Letter Book; Israel Pern- berton to Joseph Sidebotham, Dec. 16, 1734, Israel Pemberton Letter Book, 1727-1735, Marine Historical Society, Mystic, Conn. 21 Pennsylvania Gazette, Mar. 27,1735; Bezanson, 67; CSPC> XLI, 269. Reynell, writing to John Askew, June 19, 1729, noted "the great Quantity of Grain that has been Exported from Hence for Ireland this Spring." Reynell Letter Book. 410 JAMES G. LYDON October (forty-one) drew the large majority of these clearances. Return cargoes to Ireland allowed vessels to turn around at the port, keeping freight and passenger rates down. Export of wheat and flour to famine-stricken Irish ports in the late twenties and in the thirties helped swell these statistics. In fact, before direct shipment to Ireland was allowed, vessels cleared to British and Scottish ports and then carried emigrants out from Ireland. The sharp decline in trade to Scotland after the Irish trade was opened demonstrates that the latter was more profitable. Though trading to the West Indies was not as attractive as it had been, it was still Philadelphia's major outlet despite French competition, the depletion of the sugar lands in Barbados, the spread of the parasitic "Barbados Blast," and hurricanes and droughts. The lan- guishing state of the West Indies had a decided influence on the city's trade. WEST INDIAN TRADE, 1720-1739

ENTRANCES CLEARANCES % % % % Fes. Total Tons Total Fes. Total Tons Total 1720 78 80 1,890 57 79 84 2,190 13 1 1721 7 76 i,75o 53 69 73 1,680 SI 1722 40 (>3 870 34 58 77 1,770 62 1723 42 74 i,33o SS 5i 75 1,870 64 1724 58 74 1,980 61 59 77 2,300 70 1725 st 67 1,760 49 ts 74 2,410 61 1726 7i 63 2,510 48 86 72 3,57O 61 1727 64 73 2,330 57 74 79 3,120 7o 1728 58 1,910 37 64 64 2,480 54 1729 62 S3 2,080 34 77 ^3 3,230 5i 1730 82 77 3,52o 6$ 91 13 4,280 67 1731 77 3,280 55 86 62 4,170 S* 1732 69 3,160 52 64 65 2,930 56 1733 83 3,600 SS 106 67 5,070 59 1734 89 *3 4,38o SI 87 52 4,160 45 1735 66 52 2,890 40 74 5i 3,240 40 1736 68 44 2,780 33 83 52 2,75o 44 1737 81 SS 3,36o 42 81 5i 3,43O 41 1738 87 62 3,49O 48 80 SS 3,59O 48 1739 70 47 2,740 33 81 47 3,450 37 The marked decline of Philadelphia's trade with the West Indies, in relation to other trades, is quite significant. In addition, statistics for estimated tonnage demonstrate that this traffic made up a smaller 1967 PHILADELPHIA S COMMERCIAL EXPANSION 4II part of the city's trade than figures for vessels alone indicate. The size of the vessels trading to the Caribbean declined and at the same time an increasing proportion of them made direct returns to Phila- delphia. Depressed prices on the London sugar market were the de- termining factors in the decline. Prices did not begin to rise until the late 1730's. While the West Indies trade had grown slowly until 1734, its decline after that date does not seem to have been caused by the Molasses Act.22 Although Governor Gordon described that legis- lation as "a severe Blow to the Trade of the Place" and "a heavy Discouragement to the industrious Farmer/' a local merchant noted in 1734 that "the Act of Parliament has not yet affected this place so much as it was Expected it would."23 The availability of more profitable markets, the poor prices for the colony's products in the Carib- bean, and the depressed sugar market in London seem to account for this change in the colony's trading pattern. Nonetheless, even in the late thirties more than forty per cent of the port's shipping cleared to the Caribbean. Barbados, Jamaica, Antigua, and St. Christopher attracted the bulk of the city's trade. Clearances to the smaller islands were relatively uncommon, though more than twice as much shipping entered from those points. Salt importation accounts for this aberration, but such imports declined in the middle and late thirties as trade to Southern Europe swelled. The foreign West Indies attracted some attention prior to 1734. However, after the Molasses Act only an occasional sloop entered from or cleared to those areas. Conditions in the individual islands caused trade to vary from year to year. Crops failed at Antigua, Barbados, and Jamaica in 1734, and in November of that year English goods moved sluggishly at Phila- dephia because West Indian merchants had made returns there "Chiefly in those Commodities."24 When Antigua reported in 1736, 22 See Richard Pares, War and Trade in the West Indies (Oxford, 1936); Gilman M. Ostrander, "The Colonial Molasses Trade," Agricultural History, XXX, 177-184; Richard B. Sheridan, "The Molasses Act and the Market Strategy of the British Sugar Planters," Jour- nal of Economic History, XVII (1957), 62-83; Bezanson, 164-171; Joseph E. Johnson, ed., "A Quaker Imperialist's View of the British Colonies in America, 1732/' PMHB, LX(i936), 129. ^ New England Weekly Journal, Jan. 17, 1732; Pennsylvania Gazette, May 10, 1733; Pemberton to Jeremiah Browne, July 25, 1734, Pemberton Letter Book; Reynell to Samuel Dicker, Aug. 26, 1736, Reynell Letter Book; Bezanson, Table I. 24 Pemberton to Lawrence Williams, Nov. 15,1734, Pemberton Letter Book. The St. Kitts crop was off by half in 1734; clearances to there dropped by fifty per cent. 412 JAMES G. LYDON October "We are almost burnt up," clearances to that island the following year dropped by nearly a third. In 1738 Bermuda was short of grain and supplies were rushed off to meet the demand.25 Facing a crisis caused by the limitations of the West Indian market, the city's merchants turned to Southern Europe. Sources of supply for the Iberian grain market shifted in the early eighteenth century. Mediterranean and North African production declined and dislocations in the Baltic made the Dutch supply uncertain. English surpluses and an export subsidy for grain enabled British merchants to establish a strong position in Iberia. Increasing demands from Iberia for Pennsylvania's surplus wheat and for corn, flour, pipe- staves and other goods, saw the city again enter this trading area in the I72o's and increase its share of the market down to 1739. Mer- cantile regulations were conspicuously permissive here; nonenumer- ated products of all types could be carried and wines from Madeira and the Azores brought in return. Trade to Southern Europe was largely a one-way traffic, leaving excess shipping there without employment as Philadelphia could ab- sorb just so much wine. In the mid-twenties, the colony spent more than £200 for lobbying a bill through Parliament which would allow direct importation of Portuguese and Spanish salt. The salt was purportedly to encourage the development of a fishery for which the colony was 'Very commodiously suited."26 In fact, grain could be more profitably sold in Southern Europe if a salt cargo could be returned repaying the costs of the voyage. TRADE WITH SOUTHERN EUROPE, 1720-1739 ENTRANCES CLEARANCES % % % % Fes. Total Tons Total Fes. Total Tons Total 1720 3 3 150 4 7 7 270 9 1721 3 3 230 7 11 12 480 16 1722 6 9 390 9 12 420 15 1723 — — — — 9 13 420 14 1724 4 5 210 6 11 14 660 19 25 New England Weekly Journal, May n, 1736; Sept. 14,1736; May 24,1737; Oct. 18,1737; Oct. 3, 1738; Reynell to Daniel Flexney, Oct. 31, 1737, Reynell Letter Book; Pennsylvania Gazette, Apr. 14, 1737. 26 Mabel P. Wolff, The Colonial Agency of Pennsylvania, IJI2-IJ5J (Philadelphia, 1933), 31; Henry C. Hunter, How England Got Its Merchant Marine, 1066-1776 (New York, 1935), 254-255; Frederick B. Tolles, Meeting House and Counting House (New York, 1963), 106-108. 1967 PHILADELPHIA S COMMERCIAL EXPANSION 413 TRADE WITH SOUTHERN EUROPE, 1720-1739 {Continued) ENTRANCES CLEARANCES % % Fes. Total Tons Total Fes. Total Tons Total 1725 2 2 no 3 n 12 740 19 1726 4 3 180 3 16 13 1,110 19 1727 2 2 180 4 8 9 470 11 1728 8 8 500 10 15 15 790 17 1729 6 5 39O 6 18 15 1,300 20 1730 4 4 240 4 13 10 790 12 1731 12 10 770 13 23 16 1,450 19 1732 6 5 39O 6 11 II 830 16 1733 16 13 [,030 16 16 10 950 11 1734 17 12 [,OIO 13 33 20 2,130 23 1735 21 16 [,500 21 33 23 2,420 30 1736 23 [,560 18 3^ 20 2,100 25 1737 26 18 ][,720 21 45 28 2,740 32 1738 18 13 1[,I2O 15 28 19 1,690 22 1739 32 21 cL,24O 27 S3 30 3,58o 38 The size of the Iberian demand at first precluded much concern in England over colonial competition. In 1732, England shipped an estimated 800,000 quarters of wheat to Southern Europe; in compari- son, Philadelphia's exports were insignificant.27 A subsidy of five shillings per quarter gave the English a decided advantage. Philadel- phia's wheat never brought more than three shillings sterling per bushel in this era when English prices were often twice as high.28 But colonial grain, despite the longer voyage, did compete and, as the colonial surplus grew, an attempt was made to shut American grain out of this market.29 Lisbon and Madeira attracted the bulk of the city's shipments with the former taking more than forty per cent of the total tonnage bound to Southern Europe. After 1734, Cadiz and Gibraltar, ideally located to forecast demand "up the Streights," rose rapidly in importance. Vessels cleared also to Barcelona, Leghorn, and Genoa, but the great majority went to ports outside the Straits. As Anglo-Spanish

27 Pennsylvania Gazette, Oct. 25, 1733. Pennsylvania exported only 25,000 quarters in 1734- 1735, ibid., Mar. 27, 1735. See A. H. John, "Agricultural Productivity and Economic Growth in England, 1700-1760," Journal of Economic History, XXV (1965), 25. 28 Lester, 90-91; Thomas Ashton, Economic Fluctuations in England, 1700-1800 (Oxford, 1959), 181-182; Bezanson, 12-29, Table I; Ralph Davis, The Rise of the English Shipping Industry (London, 1962), 311. 29 Wolff, 90-92; Bezanson, 29. 4I4 JAMES G. LYDON October relations fluctuated, the colony's merchants were bedeviled by rumors and alarms. The crisis preceding war in 1739 saw only two vessels sail to Spain, while twenty-five went off to Portugal, again emphasizing the importance of Portuguese markets. Cargoes sold in Southern Europe in return for a salt lading and a large overplus to be transferred to London in bills of exhange. De- pressed West Indian markets made this easy transferral of credits to England doubly important. In 1736, John Reynell wrote: "the Lisbon Trades and Cadiz Likewise has Answered Better of Late then the West Indies/'30 London merchants were urged to send Philadel- phia wheat to Lisbon and have the proceeds remitted "home," by which they "wou'd have—Returns very nigh as soon as if they were made in Bills directly from hence."31 In the later thirties, this area was the prime source of credits for the colony. The volume of this trade had important effects on Philadelphia's other markets. Israel Pemberton wrote to the West Indies in 1735: "the great Exportation of Grain to Europe will advance the Price of flour here so its imagin'd your markets will not be glutted with bread or flour this year."32 Returning vessels flooded the city with salt and wine. Between March, 1734, and March, 1735, almost forty per cent of the wine brought in was re-exported; and, as for salt, an agent com- plained in 1736: "what I shall Do with his Salt I Can't Tell for there has been such Large Quantities Imported from the Streights, Isle of May & St. Christopher's."33 Since Portuguese salt was preferred, imports from the Caribbean slackened and some of the excess salt was worked off in the coastal trade. Seasonal fluctations in prices of cer- tain products definitely reflect shipments to Southern Europe. In fact, in the thirties the Iberian market was a major factor in Penn- sylvania's expanding economy. The growth of the colony's coastal trade in the 1730's reflects the increase in its population and the rapid expansion of its overseas con- nections. Rhode Island trade rose sharply, especially after 1732, sug-

30 Reynell to M. L. Dicker, Nov. 19,1736, and also for Iberian demand to R. Deeble, Mar. 13, 1736, Reynell Letter Book; Pennsylvania Gazette, Oct. 25, 1733; Sept. 19, 1734; Feb. 23, 1737; Mar. 31, 1737; June 30,1737; New England Weekly Journal, June 7, 1737; Aug. 2, 1737. 31 Reynell to Peter & John Williams, May 21, 1731, Reynell Letter Book. 32 Pemberton to Samuel Dicker, Jan. 11, 1735, Pemberton Letter Book. 33 Pennsylvania Gazette, Mar. 27, 1735. Almost 3,000 bushels of salt were re-exported. Reynell to Daniel Flexney, Sept. 10, 1736, Reynell Letter Book. 1967 PHILADELPHIA S COMMERCIAL EXPANSION 415 gesting the possibility of illegal sugar and molasses importations, but the major trading areas, Massachusetts and South Carolina, dominated through both decades. Together they accounted for about half of the city's coastal traffic. These statistics are complicated by the fairly large number of immigrant vessels which unloaded their passengers at New Castle and then cleared from Philadelphia. Between 1735 and 1738, forty-three coasters made only one voyage to Philadelphia, but in many cases individual vessels constantly shuttled back and forth. By the mid-thirties, a primitive packet serv- ice had been established with Boston, New York, Maryland, Vir- ginia, and South Carolina. Sloops and schooners often turned around within two weeks of their arrival and returned to port again in five or six weeks. Round voyages were common, but more tonnage came in from New England than cleared for there in twelve of these twenty years, COASTAL TRADE, 1720-1739 ENTRANCES CLEARANCES % % % % Ves. Total Tons Total Ves. Total Tons Total 1720 25 20 500 13 33 26 1,210 29 1721 37 28 740 18 42 3i 910 24 1722 34 35 710 22 35 32 930 25 1723 22 28 670 22 18 21 600 17 1724 27 26 630 19 26 25 650 16 1725 24 23 710 17 29 25 910 19 1726 22 17 570 IO 22 16 610 9 1727 25 23 570 12 35 27 760 15 1728 41 29 1,020 17 41 29 1,130 20 1729 39 26 1,190 18 37 23 1,190 16 1730 5o 32 1,250 19 48 28 1,410 18 1731 62 35 1,810 24 50 27 i,43O 16 1732 39 27 1,070 15 29 28 1,140 18 1733 5* 31 1,560 19 63 29 1,820 18 1734 69 33 1,770 19 68 29 1,880 17 1735 66 34 1,840 2O 63 30 1,830 18 1736 59 28 1,440 64 29 1,630 16 1737 15 34 2,040 2O 78 33 2,090 20 1738 64 31 1,700 19 15 34 2,460 25 1739 68 33 1,840 19 63 27 1,660 16 Coasters exchanged the commodities of the various colonies and overseas goods, when they could not be sold in the local market. Some of the excess salt and wine went out in these vessels. There is 416 JAMES G. LYDON October little evidence of a heavy movement of wheat and flour northward in this period. Wheat prices at Boston were consistently lower than at Philadelphia down to 1736, as local supplies dominated the New England market.34 Price comparisons in the later thirties indicate a different situation. The poor harvest in most of North America in 1737 saw Philadelphia's coastal trade reach its peak in that year and the next. Some topsail vessels entered from overseas and then cleared coastal. In the twenties, they went off to the tobacco colonies or occa- sionally to South Carolina or New England. Smaller harvests in Pennsylvania may have accounted for these clearances to the tobacco colonies. Freight rates perhaps played a part, or an owner's desire that his vessel return direct to England. After 1731, German immigrant carriers, which arrived in the early fall, rather than wait two months for a lading sailed off to South Carolina and then took a rice cargo to the Netherlands, clearing British customs on the way. The colony's merchants gained important credits in the coastwise trade which more than doubled in these twenty years. But the city still offered no challenge to Boston's domination of coastal shipping; its entrances and clearances coastwise were four times those of the Quaker center.35 Shipowners faced serious risks to their investments in these years. Piracy was prevalent. One Philadelphia vessel fell prey to them in 1724, and the previous year the city's trade had been "entirely stopped by them, no vessel daring to go out" for more than two months.36 Cruising naval vessels had eliminated that problem by the 1730's. Some tonnage was lost to tumultuous seas and great winds, but dangers from Moroccan corsairs proved chimerical. In the West Indies, the guarda costas of Spain posed a threat. In fact, Spanish war rumors so dulled the fears of the city that in 1738 John Reynell wrote: "there has been so much talk of it & so long that the People here won't believe anything of it, till they see it actually Begun."37

34 Lester, 90-91; Bezanson, Table I; Arthur H. Cole, Wholesale Commodity Prices in the United States, 1700-1861 (Cambridge, Mass., 1938), Appendix A, 117. 35 Philadelphia did not overtake Boston's commercial lead before 1740. Boston's coastal trade alone was four times that of the Quaker city in this period. 36 American Weekly Mercury', July 26, 1722; Mar. 19, 1724. 37 Reynell to Nathaniel Cooper, Oct. 9, 1738, Reynell Letter Book. 1967 PHILADELPHIA'S COMMERCIAL EXPANSION 417 In general, the expansion of the city's trade was not limited by these risks. Mercantilism did not stifle the city's commercial growth. Though the Molasses Act controlled the colony's trade more tightly, the opening of Ireland to colonial goods and the granting of the salt importation privilege offset its disadvantages. Currency controls were not stringent. Paper money issues in 1723, 1729, and 1739 received a grudging acquiesence in England.38 Since the colony was not yet ready to expand industrially, production controls were not too oner- ous. Returns were difficult to arrange; bills were hard to come by and expensive. But the constant complaints of the merchants sometimes awakens the suspicion that they protested too much. New markets, expanding old ones, the specie influx via immigration, all should have made hard money and bills more readily available. The expansion of trade affected the whole economy of the city. All of the industries peripheral to shipping profited from it: ship chandlers, ropewalks, sail lofts, and, of course, the merchants most of all. Shipyard production has already been noted. New wharves provided more port facilities. Population increase required more goods of local production as well as greater imports. Land prices rose and the city increased in size, with sixty brick buildings under con- struction in 1735.39 The port's trade statistics over these twenty years demonstrate the economic influences behind the city's growth and the inter- relationship of its various trading sectors. In 1720, Philadelphia had depended heavily on the West Indian outlet. When that trade be- came more and more depressed, Philadelphians faced the future with a good deal of trepidation. Then, in the late twenties and in the thirties, the opening of a direct trade to Ireland, the growth of the immigrant traffic, the redevelopment of the outlet in Southern Europe, and the rapid growth of the coastal trade, all offered opportunities for profit. Wheat or flour sent out to these areas decreased the surplus of Pennsylvania products in the Caribbean. The West Indies still remained most important but the colony now had a much better balanced system of trade.

38 Lester, 79, 80, 83, no. 39 New England Weekly Journal, July 21, 1735; Aug. 12, 1735. 418 JAMES G. LYDON October The outbreak of war in 1739 brought a temporary halt to the city's commercial expansion, ending this phase of its development. Further examination of the port's customs statistics should demonstrate how, why, and when Philadelphia overtook and passed Boston to become the major commercial center of North America. A considerable body of work has been produced on colonial commerce on the eve of the American Revolution; much more needs to be done to make those studies more relevant for the whole colonial period. While it is ob- viously of little value to study the relationship of one port with one trading area over a short period, longer series of data for several ports might, for example, expose the history of the North American- West Indian trade, as well as its relationship to European economic history and to developments in the various islands. The same holds true of immigration movements, the Irish trade, trade to Southern Europe, and even the coastwise exchange of goods. Thorough examination of these areas would add immeasurably to our knowledge of the commercial expansion of the Atlantic community.

T>uquesne University JAMES G. LYDON