“In spite of considerable burdens which were occasioned by the revolution,
and left as a legacy to the present government—in spite of extraordinary
expenses caused by the reorganization of the army—in spite of numerous
contributions towards the encouragement of public works, the state budget,
which, at the commencement, exhibited a tolerably large _deficit_, has
been gradually tending towards equilibrium. I have had the honor recently
of pointing out to your Excellency, that the deficit of 1857 has been
reduced to an insignificant sum, consisting for the most part of
unexpected expenses, and of money reserved for the extinction of the debt.
The taxes remain still much below the mean rate of the different European
States. A Roman pays the state 22 francs annually, 68,000,000 being levied
on a population of 3,000,000. A Frenchman pays the French government 45
francs, 1,600,000,000 being levied on a population of 35,000,000. These
figures show, demonstratively, that the Pontifical States, with regard to
so important a point, must be reckoned amongst the most favored nations.
The expenses are regulated on principles of the greatest economy. One fact
is sufficient. The civil list, the expenses of the cardinals, of the
diplomatic corps abroad, the maintenance of Pontifical palaces and the
museum, cost the state no more than 600,000 crowns (3,200,000). This small
sum is the only share of the public revenue taken by the Papacy for the
support of the Pontifical dignity, and for keeping up the principal
establishments of the superior ecclesiastical administration. We might ask
those persons, so zealous in hunting down abuses, whether the
appropriation of 4,000 crowns to the wants of the princes of the church
seems to them to bear the impress of a proper economy exercised with
respect to the public revenue?
AGRICULTURE—DRAINING THE CAMPAGNA—PRISON DISCIPLINE—ADMINISTRATION OF
CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS—ABUSES—JUDICIAL SYSTEM, ETC.
“Agriculture has been equally the object of encouragement, and also
gardening and the raising of stock. Lastly, a commission, composed of the
principal landed proprietors, is now studying the hitherto insoluble
question of draining the Campagna of Rome, and filling it with
inhabitants. There is, in truth, misery here as elsewhere, but it is
infinitely less heavy than in less favored climates. Mere necessaries are
obtained cheaply. Private charities are numerous and effective. Here also
the action of the government is perceptible. Important ameliorations have
been introduced into the administration of hospitals and prisons. Some of
these prisons should be visited, that the visitor may admire—the term is
not too strong—the persevering charity of the Holy Father. I will not
extend this enumeration. What I have said ought to be sufficient to prove
that all the measures adopted by the Pontifical administration bear marks
of wisdom, reason and progress; that they have already produced happy
results; in short, that there is not a single detail of interest to the
well-being, either moral or material, of the population, which has escaped
the attention of the government, or which has not been treated in a
favorable manner. In truth, when certain persons say to the Pontifical
government, ‘form an administration which may have for its aim the good of
the people,’ the government might reply, ‘look at our acts, and condemn us
if you dare.’ The government might ask, ‘not only which of its acts is a
subject of legitimate blame, but in which of its duties it has failed?’
Are we, then, to be told that the Pontifical government is a model—that it
has no weakness or imperfections? Certainly not; but its weakness and
imperfections are of the same kind as are met with in all governments, and
even in all men, with very few exceptions. I am perpetually interrogating
those who come to me to denounce what they call the abuses of the Papal
government. The expression, it must be remembered, is now consecrated, and
is above criticism or objection. It is held as Gospel. Now, in what do the
abuses consist? I have never yet been able to discover. At least, the
facts which go by that name are such as are elsewhere traceable to the
imperfection of human nature, and we need not load the government with the
direct responsibility of the irregularities committed by some of its
subordinate agents. The imperfections of the judiciary system are often
cited. I have examined it closely, and have found it impossible to
discover any serious cause of complaint. Those who lose their causes
complain more loudly and more continuously than is the custom in other
places, but without any more reason. Most of the important civil cases are
decided in the tribunal of the Rota. Now, in spite of the habitual license
of Italian criticism, no one has dared to express a doubt of the profound
knowledge and the exalted integrity of the tribunal of the Rota. If the
lawyers are incredibly fertile in raising objections and exceptions—if
they lengthen out lawsuits—to what is this fault to be attributed if not
to the peculiarity of the national genius? Lastly, civil law is well
administered. I do not know a single sentence the justice of which would
not be recognized by the best tribunal in Europe. Criminal justice is
administered in a manner equally unassailable. I have watched some trials
throughout their whole details; I was obliged to confess that necessary
precautions for the verification of facts—all possible guarantees for the
free defence of the accused, including the publication of the
proceedings—were taken.”