It is not a _treatise_ that the Author announces; it is nothing more than
_Thoughts on the Mechanism of Societies_. Such a title does not confine
a Writer to a regular plan; it saves him even the risk of preparing
his Readers for a chain of ideas which cannot escape their sagacity if
it exist, and on which they cannot be deceived if it do not. But in a
picture consecrated to the world at large as well as to his own Country,
to the People as well as to their Rulers, it was necessary that the most
striking object, the object to which their first attention was called,
should be of so general an interest, as to entice them progressively
to an investigation of all those details which deserve most to be
scrutinised, and of which the different relations are either little
known, or greatly mistaken.
The object which at present fixes the attention of all the States in
_Europe_, (all of them either debtors or creditors), is the _National
Debt of England_, and the measures which will be taken on that subject
by the Assembly the most clear-sighted of any in the world to every
thing that concerns the interests of the people, the most jealous of its
rights, and the most free, at least in its debates. It is by considering
that formidable debt, and its influence on the wealth of the State and
the ease of the People, that the Author dares to begin. But before he
proceeds to unfold the mechanism of the national debt, the result of
which developement presents some ideas too opposite to the received
opinion, he endeavours by degrees to familiarise his Readers with his
own, by _some general reflexions on the present situation of England_:
these reflexions leave him no room to doubt, that _England_ was in
1779, _notwithstanding the national debt_, richer than she was at the
beginning of this century;—richer, either in a fourfold, or in a double
proportion, as the Reader is disposed to adopt the one or the other rate
of population: whence it appears that the Author, in respect to his plan,
does not affix any importance to the difference of opinions on this
article.
_A more particular view of the subject_ furnishes him with fresh reasons,
which seem to him sufficient to quiet the mind of the most suspicious
creditor. It is, indeed, only by means of the _savings_ made, or daily
to be made, upon eight pence (the exact proportion each individual is
entitled to in the general revenue), that it has been possible to reach
the summit of opulence, and that it is possible to be fixed there:
but the Author seeks for such _savings_ in agriculture and industry,
as cannot be misunderstood; he observes that the savings made in
agriculture, have proved sufficient, in the course of a century, not
only to discharge all the public burdens, but even to double the landed
revenue; and he then enters into a detail of several objects, (all easy
to be ascertained,) which seem to demonstrate a similar progress in
industry.
Here our Author, beginning to feel himself on ground sufficiently firm,
confesses that he sees nothing in the present situation of _England_,
tending to justify the idea of a national bankruptcy, although the
public news-papers often hint at the convenience of such a measure. The
author even so far forgets himself, as to examine _seriously_, whether
it would be profitable or unprofitable to effect the so much recommended
_reimbursement_, _even on the supposition that the 238 millions which
have been borrowed, and have disappeared, could find their way back to
the Exchequer_.
After having presented the question under several points of view, our
Author hesitates not to declare for the negative, and then endeavours
to prove that a previous _thesaurisation_ which might have enabled the
nation to go through the last war without laying any additional tax,
would have done more harm than the new taxes can possibly have done.
The Author, become bolder because he meets with no contradiction when he
is alone, (and indeed he is alone very often) undertakes to reconcile
mankind to the taxes by means of a first decomposition of the impost;
he gives up, it is true, one part of it as burdensome, (it is truly to
be lamented that this part cannot be dispensed with; luckily it is the
least); but he contends boldly for the other part, as a very precious
resource for that portion of the people which best deserves to engage the
cares of Government.
Notwithstanding all the precautions taken by the Author not to frighten
his readers, there remains such a leap for him to clear, that he is seen,
as it were on his knees, begging he may be permitted to try twenty
times, if he cannot clear it in ten: in other words, he earnestly wishes
that his work may not receive its final judgement before it has been
perused to the end; and in fact, it is not impossible but that a detached
proposition, the absurdity of which is striking when considered singly,
may be found conclusive when successively brought near to all those that
are to follow it.
An Editor owes more to the Public, than to any work, even such as he
could wish to bring into some trifling repute: I think then, it is my
duty (_in foro conscientiæ_) to declare, that it will not be till the
Reader has perused fifty pages or more, that he will suspect the reason
why the Writer has not announced in the very first, some singular
opinion, which he meant insidiously to establish as it were step by step
in his pamphlet; but, at length, we begin to have some notion of what we
are to expect from a man who has been trying to wheedle us into a belief,
that _taxes are a trifling evil;—that ~thesaurisation~ would be a very
great one;—that a reimbursement is at best useless_;—and who afterwards
modestly intimates, that some singularities may perhaps escape him _in
the sequel_; as if it were possible to imagine any thing more singular
than the three propositions I have just quoted.
Yet too much severity should not be used. Has the Reader been but amused
with the part of the picture hitherto exposed to his view? Let him
humour the Author in his little conceits. Who would exhibit for public
entertainment, if he were not at liberty to draw up the curtain in his
own way; if he had not a right to display, at every shifting of the
scene, that part only of his curiosities upon which he meant for that
instant to fix the eyes of the spectator?
But if the Reader, in spite of the different positions into which he has
been attracted, has not observed the least alteration in the compass;
if he has not been moved by the arguments with which he has been lured
before he came to that part of the work—let him throw the piece into
the fire; for the Author, of whom I do not pretend to imitate the
circumspection, or adopt the fears, or justify the temerity, or share
in the guilt, aims at nothing less than to induce _all Europe_ (all
_Europe_!) to investigate,
_1st_,
Whether it could possibly cost _England_ more than 5 millions sterling,
(_found once for all_) to secure _for ever_, in the most solid manner,
the payment of the interest on a debt of 238 millions, that interest
rated at 9 millions, of the same currency?
_2dly_,
Whether there be not, (without its being suspected), in the system of
finance in _England_, some of those imperfections so well remarked, so
fully, so bitterly criticised in that of _France_; and whether a national
reimbursement be not the easiest of all the sports a Minister of finance
can think of, to amuse society without serving it?
_3dly_,
Whether the possibility of a balance of trade, _always favourable_,
be not as doubtful as the necessity of a national bankruptcy, and the
advantage of a national reimbursement?
_4thly_,
Whether an equilibrium in all things (and every where), be not
indispensable; and whether, to maintain or restore it, any great effort
of imagination be required on the part of those who fancy they hold the
balance?
_5thly_,
Whether the difference of prices be something or nothing; and whether
more has been wanted by the _French_ than 66 millions _Tournois_ (_found
once for all_), to secure _for ever_, the interest at _5 per cent._ on a
national loan of 1,500 millions _Tournois_?
_6thly_,
Whether the monster of a competition (in point of trade) supposed
unconquerable on account of the low prices with which it should be armed,
be not as fantastical as that of a balance always favourable?
_7thly_,
Whether the most justifiable premium for exportation be any thing more
than one piece of injustice, become necessary to counterbalance a great
many others?
_8thly_,
Whether it do not result from the ever infallible and merely mechanical
restoration of an equilibrium in all the prices, that the taxes are in
themselves completely innocent;—whether there be more than one kind
of taxation, which increases only by the exact amount of the tax, the
whole mass of prices;—whether the effect of taxation be not trebled by
all other imposts;—whether the most pernicious of them, (after the
poll-tax), be not the tax on luxury;—and whether from the instant that
all kinds of taxes, either judiciously or injudiciously contrived,
have re-acted on every thing, the burthen of the national debt is not
literally _null_ in all countries?
_9thly_,
Whether, _after monopoly_, credit be not that effect of wealth which
increases most the price of every production, both of agriculture and
industry?
_10thly_,
Whether a certain country, where smuggling has been prohibited under pain
of the galleys, be not indebted to smuggling itself for one fifth of the
products of her agriculture, which the merchant and trader turn to their
advantage with as little scruple, as if they had not petitioned for the
detestable law against the smuggler?
_11thly_,
Whether the absurdity of the general opinion, on the most efficacious
means of establishing a profitable competition, in point of trade, be not
clearly evinced, by the account of a strange revolution in _France_—a
revolution, as indubitable as the two wars in 1755 and 1779?
_12thly_,
Whether the impossibility of the two supposed balances, constantly at
the disposal of _England_ and _France_, be not proved, by the very
facts adduced in both countries to establish the existence of those two
monsters?—Whether that impossibility be not demonstrated by other facts
as little equivocal; and whether it be not the interest of _England_ and
_France_ to renounce the Idol, and solemnly abjure both its works and its
pomps?
_13thly_,
Whether imports and exports be not a mere sport, as innocent as the
game of tennis? A sport, nevertheless, which all Governments might turn
to great profit, all Subjects to great advantage, and all States to an
increase of power and wealth.
_14thly_,
Whether the generality of exports from _England_, at different periods,
considered with regard to her foreign correspondence, do not demonstrate
a kind of electricity, unthought of hitherto, though not unworthy of
amusing the greatest politicians at their leisure moments?
_15thly_,
Whether the trifling jest of luxury be not equally as innocent as the
diversion of exporting and importing; and how much the most fastuous, the
most profuse, the most sensual of all monarchs, consumes, above the most
avaricious of all his subjects?
_16thly_,
How much (not counting shillings and pence) _England_ has lost, when her
right-arm, as her colonies were called, was lopped off; and how much
(not counting shillings and pence) _Europe_ might lose by losing her
sovereignty over both the _Americas_?
_17thly_,
Whether all that had appeared to the Author, as founded in reason and
equity, do not finally prove (in spite of the general conspiracy of
all Nations and all Ministers) to be strictly conformable to the most
stubborn facts;—and whether it do not result from that mass of facts
and reasons, that the Author’s assertion, the most interesting to
mankind, (that is, to all Princes and their People) is not of the most
irrefragable truth, and a truth the most easily brought within the reach
of all the parts interested therein?
I, though merely Editor, shall venture still further;—I shall suppose the
result of this combination of facts and reasons to be, that the means
hitherto devised as the most proper to alleviate the burdens of the
people, were the best devised to oppress them: What matters it to the
people, provided they are to be oppressed no longer? What is the time
past, but the baseless fabric of a vision?
I shall likewise suppose, that from those facts and reasons it should
result also, that never was a decrease in the Prince’s revenue more
effectually secured, than by the contrivances devised to increase it:
What is it to the Prince, provided it be no longer possible to mistake
the true means of enriching him?—Is it not the time to come, that should,
above all, engross the attention of a Great Prince?
I shall again suppose, as another result, that it has been a mistaken
notion, to imagine that the revenue of the People must be lessened, in
order to increase that of the Prince:—What is that to the Prince—what is
it to the People—provided both be now convinced, that it is not possible
to enrich the one, either really or nominally, without enriching the
other in the same manner, and in the same proportion?
I shall further suppose, that it should evidently result also, that in
the Administration of the finances of any country, there is not, there
has not been a single principle, nay, not a single idea worthy of the
name: What is this to the Ministers who now hold that department?—Can
they command what is past? And is it not the redressing of abuses, when
discovered, that constitutes the true glory of a Ministry?
To crown the whole, I shall even suppose, that thence also should result,
to a very insignificant individual of _America_, a little sprig of
that _European_ shrub called Bay-tree:—What would that signify to all
the Ministers, all the People, and all the Princes in _Europe_?—Will
_America_ consume less _European_ goods, or will she produce less gold
and silver, for having produced an idea?