The debtors to the nation-debtor, who have gained by the exchange, are

those who have imported French commodities to England. Upon this hurtful

branch of commerce, the exchange occasions a profit; the consequence of

which is, to encourage importation.

This is not all. The merchants exporters, who have lost, cannot draw

back their loss upon the return of their trade; because the return of

their trade is the _money_ due by France, the balance included. Whereas

the merchants importers may draw back their loss upon the return of

their trade; because that return is _merchandize_, which they can sell

so much the dearer to their own countrymen.

If the balance be in favour of London, importers gain, as we have seen;

when it is otherwise, and when they are obliged to pay the exchange,

they indemnify themselves, by the sale of their goods so much the

dearer. High exchange, therefore, _may_ hurt exporters, but never _can_

hurt importers.

Let us next examine the operation of exchange at Paris.

In the Paris market, the demand will be for bills upon London for money

in Paris; and he who demands must pay the exchange. The debtors,

therefore, to the nation-creditor, must pay the exchange, and the

creditors to the nation-creditor will receive it; and as both are

Frenchmen, the profit and loss to Paris exactly balance one another.

But the debtors to the nation-creditor are here the importers of English

goods; consequently, this trade, hurtful to France, would be hurtful to

the importer, could he not indemnify himself by selling them so much the

dearer to his countrymen.

The creditors, again, to the nation-creditor, who gain the exchange, are

the exporters of French goods to England; so that here the exportation

meets with an encouragement from a balance against the country.

From the advantage found upon exchange in favour of exporters, and the

loss upon it to the prejudice of importers, in the case of a wrong

balance, it has been believed, that a wrong balance produced upon

importations and exportations are effects equal and contrary, which

destroy one another, and thereby bring the balance even.

In answer to this, I have two short arguments to offer.

The first is, that were the argument conclusive, it would hold good in

reversing the proposition; to wit, that the consequence of a favourable

balance would be to destroy the difference also, and bring the balance

even. This I never heard alleged.

My second argument is the strongest: that the enhancing of the prices of

importations will not so effectually discourage the sale of them at

home, as the enhancing the prices of exportations will discourage the

sale of them abroad; for the reasons I shall give presently. But in the

mean time,

If the compensation be considered only in relation to the merchants

importers and exporters, there, indeed, I agree, that _their_ profit and

loss upon the exchange is most exactly balanced; because what the one

party gains the other loses; and the country loses the balance only, as

has been said.

The reciprocal debts thus transacted by bills of exchange, we see that

no profit can be made, nor loss incurred, either to London, or Paris, by

that operation.

The profit to Frenchmen is compensated by the loss to Frenchmen; the

same may be said of the English merchants: but the balance due after

those operations are over, and the more remote consequences of high

exchange, affect the relative interest of the two nations.

This balance is generally sent by the country-debtor, either to the

country-creditor, or to their order in a third country, to which they

are indebted.

The transportation and insurance of this balance is an expence to those

who owe it, and the profit, if any there be on that operation, naturally

falls to exchangers of the same nation, who conduct it. So whether

exchange be paid upon bills drawn, or expence be incurred in the

transportation of balances, no profit can accrue upon that to the

nation-creditor, to the detriment of the debtor: it must, therefore, do

hurt to both, relatively to nations where, upon the average of trade,

exchange is lower.

I come now to the method of transporting balances in the metals.

We have seen how the creditors of the nation-debtor pay exchange upon

the sale of their bills on Paris, which owes the balance. If by the

operations of exchangers, this exchange should rise, to their detriment,

higher than the expence, trouble, and insurance, of bringing the balance

from Paris, then they will appoint some factor at Paris, to whose order

they will draw bills upon their debtors in that city; and as what the

Paris-debtors owe to London is stated in pounds sterling, the

London-creditors will value the pound sterling, according to the rate of

exchange, in their favour; and in their bills upon their Paris-debtor,

they will convert the sum into livres, including the exchange.

By this operation, we see how the transportation of the balance may

become the business of the creditors to the nation-debtor: which is a

combination we have not as yet attended to: a few words will explain it.

When the creditors of the nation-debtor sell their bills, they must pay

the exchange, as has been said. When they draw bills to the order of a

friend in the place where the balance is owing, they superadd the

exchange. This their debtors pay: but then they themselves must be at

the trouble and expence of bringing home the money.

It is from this alternative which both parties have of either sending

what they owe to their creditors in bullion, or of allowing them to draw

for it at the additional expence of paying the exchange, that a check

upon the extravagant profit of exchangers arises: and from this

combination arises all the delicate operations of drawing and remitting.

Into these we shall not inquire: the principle on which they depend

appears sufficiently plain, and this is the principal object of our

attention.

I proceed now to consider how far those reciprocal profits and losses,

between merchants in the same country, affect the trade of it in

general.

When the balance is favourable, we have said that the exporters lose the

exchange, and the importers gain it; and both being citizens, the

country would not be concerned in their relative interests, were it not

that these interests are connected with that of the country, which reaps

great benefit from the trade of those who deal in exportations, and loss

from the other.

If, therefore, exchange is found to hurt exportation, when the balance

is favourable, in this respect the country has an interest in bringing

it as low as possible. But as it may be said that since the return of an

unfavourable balance hurts in its turn the interests of importation, and

favours the other, exchange thereby operates a national compensation; it

will not be improper, in this place, to throw out one reflection more,

in order to destroy the strength of that argument.

Were this proposition admitted, as I am afraid it cannot, from what we

have already said, it affords no argument against doing what can be

done, to render exchange as little hurtful as possible to exportation,

during the favourable balance. But as to the question itself, of

national compensation, I cannot allow that even _exporters_ and

_importers_ are thereby brought on a level in point of trade: for this

reason, that the exchange affecting the exporters, in proportion as it

augments, discourages manufacturers, who must have regular, and even

growing profits, according to the increase of demand. These the merchant

exporter cannot afford; because he _cannot_ draw back from his foreign

correspondents, any advance upon manufactures at home, arising from

domestic circumstances. But when the merchant importer is affected by

the exchange against him; this additional expence he _can_ draw back;

because he sells to those who are affected by all domestic

circumstances.

Let us therefore determine, that it is the interest of a state to

disregard that compensation which is given to exportation by a wrong

balance, which does so much harm; and to avoid the discouragement given

to it by a right balance, which does so much good. The only way to

compass those ends, is to keep exchange as near to par as possible.

Could reciprocal debts be always exchanged at par, and could the expence

of bringing home, and sending a balance abroad, be defrayed by the

state, I think it would prove a great advantage to the trade of a

nation. I do not pretend to say that, as matters stand, the thing is

practicable; but as it is a question which relates to my subject, and

seems both curious and interesting, I shall here examine it.

At first sight, this idea will appear chimerical; and some readers may

despise it too much, to be at the trouble to read what may be said for

it. I shall therefore set out by informing them that the scheme has been

tried, in a great kingdom in Europe, under a great minister; I say it

was attempted in France, in the year 1726, under the administration of

Cardinal Fleuri, and produced its effect; although it was soon given up,

from a circumstance which, I think, never can occur in Great Britain.

After the last general coinage in France, 1726, exchange became so

unfavourable to that kingdom, that there was a general outcry. The

Cardinal, to put a stop to the clamour, and set trade to rights, as he

thought, ordered Samuel Bernard, at that time a man of great credit, to

give bills on Holland at par, to all the merchants. To enable him to

place funds in Amsterdam, for the payment of his bills, the Cardinal

supplied this exchanger with sufficient quantities of the old coin, then

cried down, and paid for the exportation of it to Holland.

Upon this exchange on Holland came to par; and all exchangers at Paris

looked on the operation with amazement. The minister, however, in a

short time discovered, that by this he was undoing with one hand, what

he wanted to establish with the other. He therefore stopped in his

career, after having paid, perhaps, ten times the balance due to

Holland.

By unfolding the combination of this operation, I shall be better able

to cast light on the question before us, than in any other way.

When the general coinage was made in France, by the arret of the month

of January 1726, all the old coin was cried down, and ordered to be

recoined. The mint price of fine gold _per_ marc was fixed at 536 livres

14 sols 6 deniers; and the silver at 37 livres 1 sol 9 deniers. These

were the prices at which the mint paid for bullion, when offered to be

coined. But the King, as if he had a right upon the metal in the old

coin, commanded it to be delivered at the mint at no higher rate than

492 livres for the marc of fine gold, and at 34 livres for the marc of

fine silver: and to compel the possessors of it to bring it in, all

exportation and melting down was made highly penal; the avenues from

France were beset with guards to prevent the going out; and the melting

pots were strictly watched. Upon this, the possessors of the old coin,

rather than sell it to the mint at so great an undervalue, had recourse

to exchangers for bills upon Holland for it: and these being obliged to

send it thither at a great expence and risk, exacted a very high

exchange, which, consequently, affected the whole trade of France.

Politicians persuaded the Cardinal, that exchange had got up so high,

not from the discredit cast on the old coin, but because of the wrong

balance, and the alteration which had been made at that time upon the

denomination of the new: and that so soon as the balance against France

was paid, exchange would return to par. Upon this the Cardinal set

Bernard to work, but he soon discovered his mistake; and by arret of the

15th of June the same year, raised the mint price of the old coin, and

then exchange became favourable.

These are all facts mentioned by Dutot, and yet he never will ascribe

the rise of exchange in France to any other cause than to the tampering

with the denominations of their coin: an operation which may rob one set

of people in favour of another; but which has very little effect upon

exchange, when other circumstances do not concur, as in the case before

us.

Now had the high exchange against France been owing to a wrong balance

upon her trade, is it not evident that the Cardinal’s operation would

have succeeded, that all demands for bills at Samuel Bernard’s office

would have been confined to the exact extent of that balance; that the

reciprocal debts would have been negotiated between the merchants at

par; and, consequently, that all expence upon exchange would have been

saved to individuals, at the small charge to government of transporting

the balance paid for the bills by the merchants at Paris?

Were prosperous trading states, therefore, conducted by statesmen,

intelligent, capable, and uninfluenced by motives of private interest,

they would make it a rule to be at the expence of sending off, and

bringing home all balances, without the charge of exchange to traders:

but the consequence of either neglect, or incapacity in the man at the

helm, would then become so fatal that it might be dangerous to attempt,

at once, so great a change in the present method of paying balances: but

I never make allowances for the defects of a statesman, while I am

deducing the principles which ought to direct his conduct.

I shall next slightly point out the bad consequences which, _upon an

unfavourable state of commerce_, might result from such a plan; and

without recommending any thing to practice, leave the reader to judge of

the expediency.

We see, that by a statesman’s giving bills at par, _on all occasions_,

and being himself at the expence of transportation and insurance, in

bringing home and sending off all balances, exchange would of itself

come to par.

The first consequence of this would be, the total annihilation of the

exchange business; and if, after that, any interruption should happen by

neglect in the statesman, trade might suffer considerably.

Another consequence is, that the most destructive trade would go forward

without a check, as long as merchants could pay the par of the bills

they demanded upon foreign parts: and this they would constantly be

enabled to do, while there was either coin or paper in circulation, as

has been explained in treating of banks of circulation upon mortgage.

The consequence of this would be, to oblige the state to pledge the

revenue of the country to strangers, in proportion to the balance owing,

over and above the extent of the metals to discharge it.

Now the question is, and this I shall leave to the sagacity of my reader

to determine, whether, as matters stand, there be any check proceeding

from high exchange which can prevent the bad consequences here set

forth. I suspect there is not. We see the most enormous sums lent by

nations to nations; raising the exchange against the lenders; turning it

in favour of the borrowers, but never preventing the loan from going

forward. Does not Great Britain, as well as France, owe amazing sums to

other nations, at the expence of paying the interest out of their

revenue? And have not all those sums been transacted by exchangers, who

have made great fortunes by it? Are not the most unfavourable balances

paid in the ordinary method? Are there not, therefore, already,

instruments in the hands of all nations, sufficient for their undoing?

How could their ruin be accelerated by this alteration in the mode of

performing the same thing?

But let it be observed, that our business, in this chapter, is to search

for methods to advance the prosperity of flourishing nations, who have a

balance owing to them; and here we have been setting forth the bad

consequences which result from _these_, to others who are in decay.

Every argument, therefore, drawn against this scheme, in favour of the

idle or prodigal, is an argument in favour of it, with respect to the

industrious and frugal. As all nations are liable to alternate

vicissitudes of prosperity and adversity, the principles here laid down

require to be carefully combined with domestic circumstances, before

they be applied to practice.

It was with a view to this distinction, that, in the title of this

chapter, I pointed out the question there proposed, as relative to the

state of it in a _prosperous trading nation_; and I am not quite clear

how far it might not be advantageous in every case: but this question I

shall not here enlarge upon. What has been said, will, I hope, be

sufficient to point out the principles upon which the decision depends;

and if any statesman inclines to try the consequences of it by an

experiment now and then, nothing is so easy as to do it, without any

detriment. This is proved from the operation performed by the French

cardinal, on the occasion of a very unfavourable and high exchange.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHAP. V.

_How, when other expedients prove ineffectual for discharging of

Balances, the same may be paid by the Means of Credit, without the

Intervention of Coin or Bullion; and who are those who ought to conduct

that Operation._

We have now applied the principles formerly laid down, towards

discovering the most proper expedients for removing or palliating the

three inconveniences to be struggled with in regulating exchange. 1. How

to estimate the value of a balance due: 2. How to pay it with the coin

or bullion of the country: and lastly, How to prevent the price of

exchange from affecting any thing more than the balance to be paid,

after all reciprocal debts have been compensated.

It remains to inquire, what are the most proper methods to acquit what a

nation may owe, after it has done all it can to pay the value of their

balance in the other way.

At first sight, it must appear evident that the only method here is to

give security, and pay interest for what cannot be paid in any other

value. This is constantly done by every nation; but as the ordinary

methods are very perplexed, and are attended with expences which raise

exchange to a great height, and thereby prove a prodigious

discouragement to trade in general: it would be no small advantage,

could all this loss on exchange be equally thrown upon every class

within the state, instead of being thrown entirely upon its commerce.

As this is the expedient to be proposed, it will not be amiss to

observe, that foreign balances arise chiefly upon four articles. 1. The

great importation and consumption of foreign productions. 2. The payment

of debts and interest due to foreigners. 3. The lending money to other

nations. And 4. the great expence of the state, or of individuals,

abroad.

Could all the bad consequences arising from these four causes, and the

high exchange occasioned by them, be cast upon that interest alone which

occasions them, I would not propose to lay the whole body of the nation

under contribution for repairing the loss.

But if from the nature of the thing, as matters stand, the whole be

found to fall upon trade, without a possibility of preventing it, in

this case, I think, it is better for the nation, _in cumulo_, to lend

its assistance, and share the burdens, than to allow it to fall upon

that part of the body politic from which the whole draws its vigour and

prosperity.

It cannot be denied, that when a heavy balance is due by a nation, it

has the effect of raising exchange upon every draught or remittance.

When bills are demanded to pay a foreign claim, it cannot be determined

from what cause the claim has arisen. Whether for national purposes or

not, the exchange is the same, and equally affects the whole interest of

trade.

If this be a fair state of the case, I think we may determine, that such

balances are to be paid by the assistance and intervention of a

statesman’s administration.

The object is not so great as at first sight it may appear. We do not

propose that the value of this balance should be advanced by the state:

by no means. They who owe the balance must, as at present, find a value

for the bills they demand. Neither would I propose such a plan for any

nation who had, upon the average of their trade, a balance against them;

but if, on the whole, the balance be favourable, I would not, for the

sake of saving a little trouble and expence, suffer the alternate

vibrations of exchange to disturb the uniformity of profits which tends

so much to encourage every branch of commerce.

We have abundantly explained the fatal effects of a wrong balance to

banks which circulate paper; and we have shewn how necessary it is that

they should perform what we here recommend. There is therefore nothing

new in this proposal: it is only carrying the consequences of the same

principle one step farther, by pointing out, as a branch of policy, how

government should be assisting to trade in the payment of balances,

where credit abroad is required; and this assistance should be given out

of the public money.

The greatest, and indeed, I think, the only objection to this scheme,

is, that by it the condition of our foreign creditors will be bettered,

for no value received from them. This I allow will be the case when the

balance is against England: but it will be compensated to the creditors

by the loss they will sustain when the balance is in her favour. But

supposing there should be a benefit to foreign creditors, will not this

circumstance raise the confidence of all the world in the English funds?

If there was a proposal made for lowering the rate of money, by

refunding the debts which bear a higher interest than what money can be

procured for, were the continent to pour her wealth into our

subscription, might we not then more readily expect a supply from that

quarter? Besides, is not all the interest due to foreign creditors paid

in bank paper? Is not this demandable in coin, and will not this coin be

exported, if credit be not found? Were the bank of England to keep a

subscription open, at all times, in Amsterdam, for money to be borrowed

there, on the payment of the interest in that city, who doubts but loans

might be procured at much less expence than at present, when we beat

about for credit every where, until by the return of a favourable

balance upon the trade of England, she shall be enabled to fill up the

void.

I feel my own insufficiency to unfold the many combinations which such

an operation must imply. I therefore shall not attempt what, at any

rate, I must leave imperfect. What has been said, combined with what has

been thrown out on the same subject, in treating of other matters, is

sufficient to give a hint, as to the expediency of the plan in general.

And as to the objection which arises from the payments to the public

creditors abroad, I shall reserve the more ample discussion of it till I

come to consider the doctrine of public credit.

END OF THE THIRD PART.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------

AN

INQUIRY

INTO THE

PRINCIPLES OF POLITICAL OECONOMY.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

BOOK IV. | OF CREDIT AND DEBTS.

PART IV.

OF PUBLIC CREDIT.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHAP. I.

_Of the various Consequences of Public Debts._

The principles which influence the doctrine of public credit are so few,

and so plain, that it is surprising to see how circumstances could

possibly involve them in the obscurity into which we find them plunged

on many occasions.

For the better clearing the way towards the main object, I shall shew,

from experience, and from the progress of public credit in some nations,

that the true principles have been overlooked, and confounded so with

extraneous objects, as to be entirely lost.

The true method of decyphering, as it were, the complicated operations

of statesmen with respect to this branch, is to bring back to their

native simplicity such plans of administration, as, from the infinite

perplexity of them, make people believe, that the principles which

influence this district of science lie so involved, as to require a

peculiar force of genius even to comprehend them.

By proceeding in this plain track, and by keeping the principles

constantly in view, the most perplexed systems of borrowing, funding,

stock-jobbing, coining and re-coining of money, changing the weight,

fineness, and denominations of specie, circulating paper in conjunction

with it, imposing upon mankind with bubbles and bankruptcies, and

calling them operations of public credit, may be rendred intelligible to

the most slender capacity.

Many of these topics have been already explained, and dismissed. This

will enable us to contract the plan of what remains in proportion to the

objects it is to comprehend.

Public credit we have defined to be, the confidence reposed in a state,

or body politic, borrowing money, on condition that the capital shall

not be demandable, but that a certain proportional part of the sum shall

be annually paid, either in lieu of interest, or in extinction of part

of the capital; for the security of which payment, a permanent annual

fund is appropriated, with a liberty, however, to the state to set

itself free, by repaying the whole, when nothing to the contrary is

stipulated.

In this definition I have put in an alternative, of paying a perpetual

interest for the money borrowed, or of paying annually a sum exceeding

the interest; which excess is intended to extinguish the capital in a

certain number of years. In both cases, the annual payment is called an

annuity. When it is exactly equal to the interest agreed on, it is

called perpetual; and determinate, when granted either for life, or for

a certain number of years.

The solidity of this security is essential to the borrowing upon the

cheapest terms: let me suppose it to be as solid as land-property, and

as permanent as government itself: what will the consequence be?

If we suppose government to go on in increasing, every year, the sum of

their debts upon perpetual annuities, and appropriating, in proportion,

every branch of revenue for the payment of them; the consequence will

be, in the first place, to transport, in favour of the creditors, the

whole income of the state, of which government will retain the

administration. The farther consequences of this revolution will furnish

matter for a chapter by itself.

If the borrowings of a state be only in proportion to the extinction of

the old capitals, or of what I have called determinate annuities, then

the debts will not increase.

When a statesman, therefore, establishes a system of public credit, the

first object which should fix his attention is to calculate how far the

constitution of the state, and its internal circumstances, render it

expedient to throw the revenue of it into the hands of a money’d

interest. I say, this is the most important object of his deliberation;

because the solidity of his credit depends upon it.

If, all the interests of the state duly considered, that of trade be

found to predominate, less inconvenience will be found in allowing the

money’d interest to swell: but in monarchies, where the landed interest

is the most powerful, it would be dangerous to erect so formidable a

rival to it. In political bodies every separate interest will consult

its own; and in the contest between those who pay, and those who receive

the taxes, under the denomination of creditors, the security of public

credit becomes precarious.

From this we may conclude, 1_mo_, That in governments where the swelling

of a money’d interest is found to threaten the tranquillity of the

state, care should be taken either to establish a sinking fund, for

paying off, in times of peace, what may have been borrowed in times of

war, or the plan of borrowing upon determinate annuities must be

established.

2_do_, If natural causes be left to work their own effects, without a

systematical plan of borrowing, the consequence will be a bankruptcy,

and a total failure of public credit, at least for some time.

3_tio_, If a state should find the mass of their debts to amount to so

great a sum as to be insupportable, they might have recourse to a total,

or partial abolition of them by an act of power.

4_to_, If they allow their debts to swell without limitation, and adhere

to the faith of their engagements, the whole property of the state will

be in constant circulation, from one class of men to another.

5_to_, If the debts contracted be the property of foreigners, these will

either remove into the country, where their funds arise, or the

property, that is, the _dominium utile_ of the country, will be

transferred from the natives.

These and many other combinations will arise from the extension of

public credit; and an examination of the most natural consequences upon

every supposition, will be the best way to acquire a distinct idea of

the subject in general. To pretend to foretell any one certain chain of

consequences, which may, in fact, result from any combination, is, I

apprehend, impossible; because every one of them will depend upon

circumstances totally unknown. These, in our way of examining matters of

this kind, are all to be founded upon supposition. To supply therefore,

in some measure, this defect, I shall first have recourse to examples of

what has happened in the hitherto infant state of public credit; and as

to cases which have not as yet taken place, we must have recourse to

ingenuity, and endeavour to form the most rational combinations we can.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHAP. II.

_Of the Rise and Progress of Public Credit._

While the policy of Princes directed them to form treasures, there was

no occasion for public credit. This policy prevailed until the rise of

the Roman empire. Then all the treasures of the world were plundered,

and nations were inslaved. On this revolution, the exigencies of that

great empire were supplied from the annual tributes paid by conquered

nations. Under good reigns, this annual supply swelled the public

treasure, until a prodigal Emperor squandered it away; and took to

rapine and extortion, to fill up the void.

Upon the total dissolution of that great empire, Europe was overrun by

barbarous nations, who, with as little industry as ever, supported their

power by the military services of the whole people.

After the establishment of the feudal kingdoms under their chiefs who

first laid the foundation of them, arose the Barons, or principal

vassals, who, in imitation of their chief, erected small principalities,

which by degrees grew independent.

This distribution of power into many hands had the effect of destroying

all systematic plans of government. Princes were obliged to act

according to the perpetual fluctuation of circumstances, until by a

revolution in their favour, the power of the vassals was swallowed up,

and confined within the limits of a more regular authority.

In proportion as this revolution took place among the nations of Europe,

the system of their government resumed a more permanent form. Justice

was administred with more uniformity; and from this arose a body of

laws, which, in some countries, were called customs: in others, as in

England, common law. Wars then became less frequent; and the military

services not being necessary on all occasions, insensibly became

converted into taxes, proportioned to the exigencies of the time.

During this period, the coin and precious metals of Europe were lodged,

in a great measure, in private coffers. If wars brought them forth for a

short time, they soon found their way back again. Princes were generally

extravagant, and spent money as fast as they got it. In proportion as

industry and alienation increased, the coin came abroad; the inhabitants

became easy in their circumstances; the state flourished, and acquired

reputation. The riches and power of a state began then to be estimated,

as they ought to be, not by their treasures locked up, but by what was

found in circulation; that is, by their industry. Venice, Genoa, and the

Hans-towns, set the example. The Jews, banished from France, on account

of their extortions in the time of the holy wars, fled, as it is said,

into Lombardy, and there invented the use of bills of exchange, for

drawing their riches from countries to which they durst not resort to

bring them off. Interest for money began to be considered as lawful in

many cases: merchants were protected by Princes, for the sake of the

consequences of trade and industry: and from such small beginnings has

that mighty engine of public credit sprung.

While Princes mortgaged their lands and principalities, in order to

obtain a sum of money, they acted upon the principles of private credit.

This was the case in the more early times, before government acquired

that liability which is necessary to establish a firm confidence. In

proportion as it drew towards a regular system, the dawn of credit put

on appearances analogous to the solidity of the fund upon which it was

established.

The second step was to raise money upon a branch of taxes assigned to

the lender, for the reimbursement of his capital and interest. We shall

shew the consequences of this plan of credit from some examples, which

will fully point out all its inconveniencies.

This plan of administration was attended with so much abuse, and so much

oppression, that statesmen began to despair of carrying on public

affairs by such expedients; and therefore concluded that the only way to

obtain money at the least expence, was to raise it on the subject within

the year, or upon what they called short funds.

At length public credit assumed its present form. Money was borrowed

upon determinate or perpetual annuities: a fund was provided for that

purpose: and the refunding of the capital was, in many cases, left in

the option of government, but was never to be demandable by the

creditor.

This is a short view of the progress of public credit. The principles

upon which it is built are so few, that were I to confine myself to a

bare deduction of them, little new or interesting could be said. I shall

therefore steer another course: I shall collect the sentiments of some

eminent politicians, who have either writ upon, or acted in the

administration of this branch of government; and by applying principles

as we go along, I shall be enabled to point out the extraneous

circumstances which are so apt to involve this subject in obscurity. Had

we not before our eyes the numberless examples of this kind, it would

hardly be possible to conceive how so great a confusion, and so many

calamities, could have followed upon the operations of public credit.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHAP. III.

_Of Anticipations, or borrowing Money upon Assignments to Taxes for the

Discharge of Principal and Interest._

I have already observed, that by the cessation of the constant wars, in

which all Europe was engaged during the feudal government of the barons,

nations began to enjoy some sort of tranquillity. Upon this the military

services became insensibly converted into taxes; and as Princes extended

their jurisdictions over the cities, which had been formerly more under

the protection of the bishops who resided in them, taxes were augmented.

These impositions were very inconsiderable, with respect to what they

brought into the King’s coffers. The policy in raising them was bad; the

frauds in collecting them were great.

These considerations engaged Princes to begin by contracting debts, and

to pay afterwards by temporary assignments to the taxes imposed.

From this again ensued the most terrible extortions on the side of the

tax-gatherers, so often complained of by those who have writ on the

affairs of France, as we shall see in the following chapter.

Philip _le bel_, King of France, was the first who, in 1301, admitted,

with great policy, the inhabitants of cities to have a seat in the

states of the kingdom. He formed them into a distinct body, and called

them _tiers etat_, or the third estate, after the clergy and the

nobility. His view was to facilitate thereby the jurisdiction he wanted

to establish over those cities, and to engage them to consent to the

imposition of taxes for carrying on his wars in Flanders, and for

opposing the ambitious views of Boniface VIII. Accordingly, the people

began to pay willingly, when once they found that they had a vote in

what concerned them.

I take it for granted, that every tax, about that time, was imposed for

a particular purpose, and assigned either to creditors, or to people who

advanced money upon it: because we are told that the first imposition

granted by the states to a King of France as a permanent branch of

revenue, was an excise upon spirituous liquors granted to Philip de

Valois, in the year 1345; at which time, however, according to Mr.

d’Eon’s _Memoires pour servir à l’Histoire generale des Finances_, there

were not less than twenty two different taxes known in France, which he

enumerates as follows:

_Tailles_, _complaintes_, _charges_, _redevances_, _coutumes_, _peages_,

_travers_, _passages_, _centiemes_, _cinquantiemes_, _ôtes_,

_chevaucheês_, _subventions_, _exactions_, _chevaleries_, _aides_,

_mariages_, _toultes_, _impositions_, _prisons_, _servitudes_, and

_nouvellettes_.

That all these impositions must have been mere trifles, I gather from a

circumstance in the Political History of France, mentioned by the author

just cited, which being itself exceedingly curious and tending greatly

to confirm many things which I have advanced concerning the small

circulation in former times, I shall here briefly mention it.

In 1356, John, King of France, applied to the States for 50,000 livres,

about 9165_l._ sterling, to pay his army. The States, besides several

other taxes imposed to pay this sum, granted him 8 deniers on the livre,

or 3⅓ _per cent._ upon all meat, drink, and merchandize, sold in France

within the year; that is to say, upon the whole alienations of France.

The tax was levied, but fell so far short of the sum required, that it

was made up by a poll-tax.

Can any example be better calculated for forming a notion of the

circulation of France at that time?

It may be here alleged that the prices of every thing were then so very

low, that no judgment can be formed concerning the _quantity_ of

alienation from the smallness of the sum. This objection is of no force,

as I shall presently shew.

We know from the records of the selling price of grain in France, which

was then remarkably cheap in proportion to the years which followed and

which had preceeded, that in 1356, the septier of wheat, or 4 Winchester

bushels, sold for 17 sols 8 deniers of the then currency, which was 12

livres to the marc fine silver, and a French soldier’s allowance for

bread, to this day, is 3 septiers, or 12 Winchester bushels a year. Now

let me suppose, that the whole 50,000 livres had been raised by this

imposition of 3⅓ _per cent._ or 1⁄30 of the total value of the single

article of corn sold at market, which was far from being the case, and

then compare that with the number of men who could have been subsisted

with all the corn sold in France at that time.

If 1⁄30 of the price was the tax, then by multiplying 50,000 livres by

30, we have the value of the corn sold; to wit, 1 500 000 livres: divide

this sum by the value of what a man consumes in a year, to wit, 3

septiers at 17 sols 8 deniers, which make 2 livres 13 sols, and the

quotient will be the number of portions for a man, to wit, 566 037. So

the whole alienation of France, at that time, fell far below the value

of as much wheat as would have fed 566 037 men.

What a poor idea does this communicate of the state of Europe only 400

years ago! It would be in vain to seek for examples to illustrate any

principle of our complicated modern oeconomy in the histories of those

times: their taxes, their credit, and their debts, resembled ours in

nothing but the name.

I now come nearer home, and give an account of the ideas of public

credit formed by Davenant, who flourished about the time of the

revolution in 1688, which I may take to be the æra of public credit in

England.

No person at that time, whose writings I have seen, appears to have so

thoroughly understood those matters as Davenant. He was a man of theory,

as well as knowledge of facts: he had an opportunity which few people

have, to be well instructed in the one and the other; and he turned his

talents to the best advantage for promoting the interest of his country.

He has writ many tracts on political subjects, which, when carefully

read and compared with what experience has since taught us, cast great

light upon many questions relative to the subject of this inquiry.

Davenant, like other great men of his time, was of opinion that

borrowing money upon what he calls short funds, was much preferable to

that upon perpetual interest; and he thought the most adviseable plan of

all, could it be accomplished, was to raise the money wanted within the

year.

Men, at that time, had a terror upon them in contracting debts for the

public: they considered the nation as they would a private man, whose

interest is one, uncompounded, and relative to himself alone: in this

light, creditors appeared as formidable as enemies; they were looked

upon by ministers as such; and this general opinion on one side,

contributed, no doubt, to make the monied people less interested in the

distress of government, and more ready to lay hold of every opportunity

of improving such occasions, for their own advantage.

Government was in constant war with creditors: when ready money failed

in England, it had nothing to pay with but exchequer tallies, upon the

taxes imposed; these were much more easily issued than acquitted. When

the first year’s amount of a tax was engaged, people considered the

security of what was to follow as very precarious; consequently, the

value of it diminished.

This method, however, succeeded far better in paying off debts already

contracted, than in contracting new ones; and the hardships put upon

those who had advanced money to government, and who were paid by

assignments upon taxes previously engaged, made people afterwards very

diffident, except upon proper security. The limited form of the English

government, prevented the violent proceedings between ministers and

public creditors, which were common in France; and this circumstance

contributed, no doubt, to establish the credit of the former upon the

better footing. But still the long expectation of payment of the capital

and interest, upon a distant fund, made Davenant acknowledge that

700,000_l._ in ready money, would at any time go farther than a million

in tallies; and yet he thought it was better for the state to borrow the

million upon a plan of discharging the debt in three or four years, than

to obtain the 700,000_l._ at the expence of a perpetual interest of 8

_per cent._

There were many more considerations which moved Davenant to prefer what

he calls short funds to perpetual interest.

It was the general opinion in his time (not his own indeed, for he

endeavoured to shew the fallacy of it) that money borrowed upon the

anticipation of a fund, _raised and appropriated for the discharge of

it_, was not a debt upon the state; because it did not diminish the

former revenue. We have a remarkable instance of the prevalence of this

opinion, in the famous memorial presented by M. Desmaretz to Philip Duke

of Orleans, after the death of the late King of France; wherein he

advances, that during seven campaigns, from 1708 to the peace of Rastad,

while he had been at the head of the King’s finances, he had not

increased the public debts by more than nine millions of livres capital:

and yet when he came into the administration, in 1708, the King’s debts

did not amount to 700 millions; and we have seen, that at the time of

his death, they were upwards of 2000 millions. But Desmaretz did not

reckon the difference of about 1300 millions; because he had settled

them upon funds of his own creation. This was so much the language of

the times, that no criticism was made upon it.

It is remarkable, that Davenant, in giving an account of the debts of

England, during the period of which he writes, that is, from the

revolution down to the peace of Ryswick, hardly ever takes notice of the

sums paid for interest upon them. The minds of men at that time were

totally taken up with the payment of capitals; and providing these could

be discharged in a few years, it was no matter, they thought, what they

cost in the mean time.

As long as nations at war observe the same policy in their methods of

raising money, the ways in which they proceed are of the less

importance: but when any one state makes an alteration, by which more

money is thrown into their hands than they could formerly obtain; this

circumstance obliges every other state to adopt the same method. Thus

while Princes made war with the amount of their treasures and annual

income, the balance of their power depended on the balance of such

resources: when they anticipated their income on both sides, for a few

years, the balance was in proportion still: when, afterwards, they

adopted long funds and perpetual interest, the supplies increased; but

still the balance was determined as formerly.

The usefulness, therefore, of an inquiry into the principles of public

credit, has not so much for its object to discover the interest of

states in adopting one mode of credit preferably to another, as to

discover the consequences of every one; and to point out the methods of

making them severally turn out to the best account for the state,

considered as a body politic by itself, and for the individuals which

compose it.

When so many different relations are taken in, the subject becomes much

more complex, and therefore the consequences _which can only be guessed

at_ must be less determinate: but on the other hand, it opens the mind,

and suggests many hints which with time may be improved for the good of

society.

People who barely relate political facts, only afford an exercise to the

memory: those who deduce principles, and trace a chain of reasoning from

them, give exercise to the understanding; and as a small spark may raise

a mighty flame, so a hint thrown out by a slender genius may set all the

great men of a nation on a plan of general reformation and improvement.

Let us now take a view of the state of public credit in England, at the

peace of Ryswick; in order to shew how Davenant came to be so great an

enemy to long funds, and more especially to perpetual interest. We shall

at the same time point out from what causes the great change of

sentiments at present proceeds.

At the peace of Ryswick, the debts of England, according to Davenant, in

his fifth discourse upon the public revenues and trade of England, stood

at 17 552 544_l._ sterling; call it 17 millions and a half, as we have

no occasion to calculate with exactness.

Of this debt the capital of 3½ millions was sunk, as he calls it;

because 1 300 000_l._ was on lives at 14 _per cent._ and what was over

to make up the 3½ millions, was intended to remain a perpetual burthen

on the nation.

For paying the interest of this sum, no less than 400 000_l._ a year was

necessary, which makes on the whole above 11 _per cent._

But then it must be observed, that more than one third of the sum was

upon lives at 14 _per cent._: the debt due to the bank, of which we have

spoken in another place, was 1 200 000_l._ for which was paid 100

000_l._ a year, including 4000_l._ allowed for the charge of management:

the remaining million was upon lottery tickets, bearing about 8 _per

cent._ the price at which the bank had lent.

The second branch of debts was near 11 millions, which, he says, were in

course of payment; because they were secured upon branches of revenue

engaged for discharging them. A part of this class of debts was to be

extinguished in the year 1700: and whenever that was done, then a

proportion of the appropriated taxes, amounting yearly to above a

million sterling, was immediately to be taken off.

The third class of debts were those not provided for at all; which in

the place referred to, he makes to amount to no more than 3 200 000_l._

but he afterwards finds his mistake, and that they in fact amounted to

above 5 millions and a half, which makes the debts of England at the

peace of Ryswick, to have been near 20 millions.

Was it then any wonder, that a man who wished well to his country,

should prefer borrowing upon short funds at any expence whatever in the

mean time, rather than at perpetual interest, when he found that

parliaments could not be prevailed upon to allow any tax to subsist one

instant after the discharge of the debts for the payment of which it had

been appropriated?

Besides, there was very little to be gained by borrowing upon long funds

and perpetual interest, as long as the lenders considered their

advantage to consist principally in getting their capitals refunded.

The plain matter of fact was, that trade at that time was only beginning

to take root in England, and demanded funds to carry it on. The use of

banks had not then been discovered, for turning property into money.

Circulation, consequently, was confined to the coin; and profits on

trade were very great. All these circumstances rendred capitals of

essential use; and the consequence was, to raise interest to an

excessive height.

Compare this situation with the present. Were the capital of 140

millions sterling thrown by Great Britain, in a few years, into the

hands of the present creditors; were France, on the other hand, to throw

in as much, what trade could absorb it? Capitals now are only of value

in proportion to the interest they bring; and so long as the interest

paid on public debts is sufficient to keep circulation full, and no

more, interest will stand as it is: when that ceases to be the case, as

in time of war, we see interest begins to rise; and when, on the other

hand, the interest paid, proves more than sufficient for the uses of

circulation, as upon a return of peace, then, from the same principles,

interest must diminish.

Davenant, like an able politician, who had the state of facts before

him, reasoned according to actual circumstances. Whatever was borrowed

on long funds, was charged on the standing revenue of the state, which

parliament was very unwilling to increase in proportion to the charges

laid upon it. This, of itself, was argument sufficient with him to cast

his view upon short appropriations, or upon his favourite object, of

raising money within the year, to supply the exigencies of the state.

But in this operation he found great difficulties. In his treatise of

ways and means, article _excises_, where he is searching for expedients

to provide money for the war, he plainly shews a thorough knowledge of

that imposition. It had taken place in England as far back as the great

civil war, and formed at the revolution about ⅓ of all the revenue: but

what is very extraordinary, and which at present will hardly be

credited, the excise had at that time the effect of sinking the price of

the subject excised, instead of raising the price of what was produced

from it. Thus the excise upon malt, after the revolution, had the effect

of lowering the price of barley, instead of raising the price of beer.

This effect of excises Davenant saw; from which he, and since him many

more have concluded, that all excises fall ultimately upon the land.

This circumstance, together with a feeling for the interest of the great

number of _idle_ poor at that time, who must constantly suffer by

excises, engaged Davenant to propose having recourse to the

land-property and poll-taxes, for raising, within the year, the sums

required for carrying on the war.

According to his proposal, there was to be no less than 3 millions

raised by a land tax, besides half a million by a quarterly poll, which

was, at that time, above 100,000_l._ more than all the permanent taxes

of England put together.

A proposal of this kind coming from Davenant, shews the difference of

situation between those times and the present. On this subject more is

to be learned by comparing facts, than by all the reasoning in the

world.

We have seen how credit stood in England during the reign of William

III. It was then in its infancy, and was set upon the principles of a

free and limited authority, exercised by ministers of state at all times

responsible to parliament at the risk of their heads, in case of any

open violation of the public faith. This is the best of all securities

against the bad exercise of power.

Whoever reads the admirable writings of Davenant, and compares his ideas

with what experience has since taught us, concerning the nature of taxes

and public credit, will plainly discover that the great distress of

England at that time, proceeded from the following causes.

The enterprize they were engaged in, was far beyond their power to

support, although they had the greatest part of Europe to assist them.

The bravery of the British nation was ill supported with money, the

sinews of war.

The coin soon after the revolution fell into the greatest disorder,

which sent it away; and no expedient was found to supply its place for

the uses of domestic circulation; and, consequently, the fixed revenue

could not be paid, nor industry carried on.

The people were unaccustomed to taxes: tunnage and poundage, the branch

with which they were best acquainted, and which they bore with the least

murmuring, because it was little felt by individuals, together with the

excise upon beer and ale, the hearth money, the post-house, and

wine-licences, composed the whole of the permanent revenue of the state,

and amounted to about one million and a half sterling: besides which,

the parliament had granted new customs (all to cease before 1690) to the

amount of about half a million more, upon wines, tobacco, sugar, and

French linnen. This was the state of the revenue at the revolution.

One would imagine that England, under so small a burthen, might have

been able to make the greatest efforts.

Were we now to grapple with France, under such circumstances, what

sanguine hopes would we not form of success! The case turned out widely

different: the first benefit the nation expected in consequence of their

liberty restored, was an abolition of the hearth money; a tax which

raised over the whole kingdom, 245,000_l._ and was considered as an

insupportable burthen.

Such sentiments and dispositions in the English nation, might have been

a sufficient indication of what was to be expected from the war; the

consequences of which had, before 1695, produced the following changes

in the revenue.

The tunnage and poundage, which at the revolution produced 600,000_l._

was by this time reduced to 286,687_l._

The excise upon beer and ale, from 666,383_l._ was reduced to

391,275_l._

The hearth money was abolished.

The post-house, from 65,000_l._ was reduced to 63,517_l._

The wine-licences, from 10,000_l._ to 5000_l._

The temporary customs which subsisted at the revolution, were now

expired, and had been either continued by new grants, or by others of

the same nature introduced in their stead. The former had produced

415,472_l._ the new produced 373,839_l._

The last and most important grant of all, was an additional excise upon

beer and ale, which produced 450,000_l._

The revenue at the revolution produced, clear of all charges, 2 001

855_l._ sterling. A revenue established at pretty much the same rate,

and nearly on the same objects, with an addition of a new excise, which

produced 450,000_l._ produced net in 1694, no more than 1 570 318_l._ so

that, deducting the new excise, the old revenue was diminished in its

produce, no less than 1 081 527_l._ or above one half, in five years

time.

In a country like England, at that time, taxes were of little use to the

state, and were an excessive burthen on the people.

What could they be paid out of? Not out of the value in the hands of the

people; because there was no way provided for turning that value into

money. The whole of the money coined before the end of the war in 1697,

did not amount to 8½ millions. It was not to be expected that during the

war, foreign coin was to come in, except in consequence of borrowing;

and we may be very certain, that all that was borrowed, and a great part

of what had been coined at home, had gone out from the year 1695 to

1697. Under these circumstances, the exchequer issued tallies of wood, a

notable expedient for facilitating circulation! And the bank of England

lent not one farthing upon mortgage: all that was possible to be raised

on the land and on the people, by pound-rate, assessment, and poll-tax,

was imposed.

Now let us recall our principles concerning circulation, alienation, and

banking upon mortgage, and combine these with what we have so frequently

repeated, and I think demonstrated, viz. that in proportion to the

extent of alienation, and the demands for money, a circulating

equivalent should be provided, so as to be ready at the hand of every

person who has property to pledge for it; and then decide whether it was

any wonder that credit in England should have been at so low an ebb at

the peace of Ryswick; that taxes should have diminished in their

produce; that interest should have risen to such an extravagant height;

that the people should have groaned under a load from which they could

not relieve themselves.

Under such circumstances, England appears to me in the light of a dumb

man put to the torture in order to extort a confession.

Were eight or nine millions sterling in coin, and a few wooden sticks,

the tallies, constantly sold at a great discount, a circulating value

sufficient to supply the exigencies of a state which was spending

annually at the rate of five or six millions?

The consequence of this total drain of money, was, that people could

neither consume exciseable commodities, or pay the taxes laid upon their

persons and solid property.

The excises failed, because the body of the people, who paid them, were

interrupted in their industry, for want of money to carry on alienation.

Those who were liable to the arbitrary impositions, such as the

landlords, could not pay; because what they had, their land, could not

be given in payment.

From what I have here laid together, we may determine, that as

alienations among individuals cannot exceed the proportion of the

circulating equivalent of a country, so a statesman when he intends

_suddenly_ to augment the taxes of his people, without interrupting

their industry, which then becomes still more necessary than ever,

should augment the circulating equivalent in proportion to the

additional demand for it.

This, according to my notions, cannot be so well compassed as, 1. by

establishing banks of circulation upon mortgage: 2. by relieving those

companies of the load of paying foreign balances by giving bills at par,

or at a small exchange: and 3. by providing funds abroad for the payment

of them, according to the principles above deduced.

Such expedients will work their effect, in a nation where the public

faith stands upon the solid security of an honest parliament, and upon

that responsibility which is fixed upon those who are trusted with the

exertions of the royal authority.

I think I may illustrate this operation by a simile.

A gentleman chooses to form a cascade of the water which serves to turn

his corn-mill; consequently, the mill stops: but in its stead, he

immediately erects another which turns with the wind. Coin is the water,

bank paper is the wind, and both are equally well calculated for the use

they are put to.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHAP. IV.

_Of the State of public Credit in France before the reign of Louis XIV.

and of the Sentiment of the great Richlieu upon that Subject._

Having laid before my reader the sentiments of Davenant on the subject

of public credit, which were analogous to the then state of England, it

may be instructive to compare them with those of another very great man,

in a rival nation; I mean the Cardinal de Richlieu.

The constitution of Great Britain at present, is pretty much what it was

in Davenant’s time: and that of France does not differ widely from what

it was at the death of Louis XIII.

Britain and France are two nations, rivals in every thing worthy of

emulation, and similar in those distresses which are the inseparable

concomitants of modern ambition, debts and taxes.

As long as the constitution of the two governments shall stand as at

present, Britain will constantly have the advantage in borrowing: France

will have it in paying off her debts. It is this contrast which engages

me to enter into the following detail. I consider it not only as a piece

of historical curiosity, but as a subject of profound reflection, from

which much instruction may be gathered.

The fate of kingly power was decided, both in Britain and in France,

much about the same time. In France, it was supported by Cardinal de

Richlieu; in Britain, it was broken to pieces under Charles I.

Before that time there was no fixed form of government established in

either country; nor can ever a regular constitution take place any

where, until the mechanism of a state becomes so complex as to render

changes extremely difficult. This is becoming the case more and more

every day; and upon this and nothing else will depend the stability of

our present forms.

Let us now take a view of the sentiments of a great minister, delivered

in writing by himself, in his political testament; the authority of

which would never have been called in question, had the matter it

contains been properly attended to, and well understood.

It is in the 7th paragraph of the 9th chapter of the testament, where

the Cardinal shews his ability in paying off the debts of France: and in

going through the subject, he casually has thrown out several things,

which enable us to form a judgment of the state of taxes, and of the

effects they were found to produce in his time.

“It is pedantry,” says he, “to maintain that a prince has no right to

draw money from his subjects, and that he ought to content himself with

the possession of their hearts. None, however, but flatterers, the pest

of society, can maintain, that he may draw from them, justly, whatever

he thinks fit; and that his right extends, in this particular, as far as

his will.”

The taxes of France at this time had been augmented far beyond heir due

proportion; and this had produced many strange and contradictory

phænomena; which, as we shall now see, misled the Cardinal in many

respects; because his experience was not sufficient to discover the

causes of them.

“The augmentation of impositions on the people,” says he, “does the King

_so much_ hurt by raising prices, as to compensate all he can gain.” If

we suppose that the King gained by the augmentation; that is to say,

that the tax, when increased, really produced more than before, and

raised prices proportionally; then the King could only lose his

proportional part, but never the whole. If the tax, by being augmented,

produced less than before, which was the case often, then he lost by a

diminution upon his income, not by the rise of prices. But this was not

the case; because deficiencies of that kind could not fall upon the

King, but upon his farmers.

The true reason was, that the King paid most of his expences by

assignments upon the taxes; and then, no doubt, the higher they were

raised, and the more difficult to recover, the dearer every undertaking

would cost the King.

This reasoning upon the effect of taxes shews, that at that time the

doctrine of them was not well understood. No wonder: theory is not

sufficient to lay open political consequences, even to the greatest

genius. All our information as to these matters arises from experience,

and all our instruction from our attention and reflection.

As a proof of this, he mentions, almost in the same place, an effect of

the increase of taxes, which is quite contrary to the former.

“Consumption,” says he, “diminishes, as taxes augment.”

This is a contingent, but not a necessary consequence, as we have seen,

and has the effect of lowering prices.

I mention these particulars, only to shew how little this great man had

studied the principles of taxation, or combined the causes of those

phænomena which he saw arising from them.

Such contrary effects could not fail to be felt, when taxes were raised

in the manner usual at that time, and when no method was contrived for

augmenting the currency.

In Richlieu’s time the custom was to treat with the _partisans_, as they

were called, or undertakers for the farm of taxes; and for a sum of

money, valued at a certain interest, to give them a right to levy

certain impositions on the people, esteemed equivalent to the rate

agreed upon; some in one province, some in another, as the parties could

agree. Then the partisans fell to work with the people, and committed

the most horrid extortions. In the 4th §. of his 4th chapter, he says,

“The abuse is carried such a length, as to be quite insupportable, and

must end in the ruin of the state; the people are plundered, not taxed;

fortunes are made by rapine, not industry: using the partisans like

spunges is very just; but liable, on the other hand, to great abuse,

when not conducted with moderation and justice.” This is a very

different system of taxation from that carried on in England in

Davenant’s time, and must have produced effects very dissimilar.

But it may be asked, if these partisans in France had found out means of

raising money, far beyond the King’s intention; what prevented the

Cardinal from examining into such means, and using them in a gentle and

equitable manner, to the extent only of satisfying the creditors for the

money borrowed from them?

In those days several difficulties occurred, which rendered this

expedient impracticable.

1_mo_, The partisans would lend in no other way; they would have nothing

to do with the King as a debtor: his credit was not well established;

and by having the direct administration of a tax, they considered

themselves as more secure.

2_do_, Had the King levied the money on the people, and been paymaster

to the creditors himself, there would have been no gains to the

partisans but what were stipulated: had they exacted more than legal

interest, they exposed themselves to great danger; and consequently

would not lend. So, by delivering up the people to be plundered, the

King made a better bargain, he thought, than any other way; and if the

partisans plundered the people, the Cardinal plundered them in his turn.

3_tio_, At this time there were not, as now, merchants of extensive

credit, and fair character, who serve as interposed persons for the

whole money’d interest in Europe, and who can fill a subscription for

millions with a single name.

The partisans themselves, as the Cardinal observes, had often neither

money or credit at setting out: but by parcelling their undertaking into

many hands, they got together what was necessary. Thus the subaltern

associates were in a moment, like locusts, spread over the whole face of

the country, and plundering went on in every quarter.

This represents a quite different system of credit from what we see

established, even in France, at present; where the tax-gatherers are

still loudly complained of, though much more than they deserve. The mode

of raising the taxes is now most exactly specified by the King; and

nothing more can be exacted than according to the plan laid down; but in

every case severe penalties are imposed upon frauds, and when levied,

are accounted for to the farmers; but when compounded for under-hand,

sink into private men’s pockets.

In a country where taxes are rightly established, industrious people

have no occasion to indemnify themselves by fraud for the taxes they

pay; they have a more certain method of being refunded. This shall be

explained in its proper place.

By this method of oppression in the Cardinal’s time, a great part of the

odium was removed from the King, and cast upon the partisans. The people

resembled a dog who bites the stick with which he has been struck,

instead of biting him who holds it[21].

Footnote 21:

Thus were taxes established in France, in spight of the great aversion

of that nation to them. The exigencies of the state were apparent;

Princes were considered as under an absolute necessity to find money

at any rate; they appeared to be in the hands of unrelenting usurers,

who became the execration of the people, to whose fury they were

sometimes delivered over, when stripped of their wealth: the people

were now and then relieved of a part of their burthen; the tax

remained under milder management; formed an addition to the King’s

revenue, and served as a fund for future emergencies.

But the nature of man is such, that the more he grows in wealth, the

more the desire of spending it increases. Thus the fund provided for

unforeseen emergencies, is insensibly incorporated with that which is

appropriated for the current service of the state.

Nothing however is more certain than that in time of war, far greater

sums are required than any people can pay, without contracting debts.

Is it not then indispensibly necessary, either, 1_mo_, To have a sum

locked up in treasure? Or, 2_do_, A fund appropriated, to borrow upon

in time of war, which may serve to pay off the debts in time of peace?

Or, 3_tio_, To borrow upon the stipulation of an annual payment, which

may, in a certain number of years, acquit both interest and principal?

The first is the plan of the King of Prussia; the second that of

England; the third is, in a good measure, that of France: Holland

borrows no more, and pays as she can what she owes; Spain lives on her

income; and Austria remained in the old way till very lately, without

credit, and consequently without much debt.

I have now said enough to point out the method of borrowing money in

France at this time, from which the nature of the security may easily be

gathered.

The Cardinal, upon the supposition of an approaching peace, enters into

the plan of paying off what had been contracted. He was resolved to

preserve credit; for even at that time, the consequence of that great

engine was sufficiently felt by this great man, to relieve the people,

and to get rid of the debts.

After a long detail of all the branches of the revenue, and after

shewing how they might be improved, he draws out a general state of

them, and of the debts affecting them; and then adds, “The total revenue

of the kingdom amounts to near 80 millions;” (the silver was then at 27

livres 10 sols the marc fine, which, valued at 2_l._ 4_s._ sterling,

makes the 80 millions worth above 6 millions sterling) “of which there

is above 45 millions engaged for the debts. By good management I pretend

that this immense load of debts, which seems to be the ruin of the King,

shall turn out to his ease and opulence. Some imagine it would be a

right measure to free the state entirely of her burthen, (a general

spunge) but as she cannot, certainly, support all the burthen, so

neither does reason dictate that she should be entirely set free.” No

modern statesman could form a better judgment of things. The Cardinal’s

ideas are just and profound; and it is astonishing how a man

uninstructed by our experience should see so far into remote

consequences.

He next lays down different schemes for paying the debts, upon the

return of peace and tranquillity. They are all arbitrary, more or less,

according to the standard of English ideas of credit. But if we abstract

from one expedient lately discovered, to wit, the diminishing the

interest, and allowing the capitals to remain, I doubt if any modern

statesman could discover any other than those which the Cardinal has

proposed.

A preliminary step to all his schemes was, _by an act of power_, to

reduce the debts which bore a higher interest, to that of the 16 penny,

or to a little more than 6 _per cent._ This method of reduction has

constantly been and is still practised in France.

Then he proposes to enter into an account with the creditors for the

sums they had received; and to consider whatever they had obtained above

the legal interest, as payments in part of the capital.

This scheme however he rejects, upon examination. He says it is

agreeable to equity; but that it would have the effect of totally

destroying all credit for the future.

The second expedient was, to reimburse the creditors the sums which they

really paid for the annuities assigned to them: but that he found

impossible to verify; because they had had the address to specify, in

their contracts, sums far exceeding what they really paid. For this

reason he rejects the second expedient also; and adopts a third, as the

best plan of any for paying off the debts. This was, to value the

capitals at what they then sold for in the market, before the peace was

concluded.

This method appeared to the Cardinal the most equitable, at least he

says so, and the only one practicable; but in my opinion it was the most

arbitrary of the three; the most liable to abuse, and the most opposite

to the principles of public credit, as at present established: and yet

it is a thought, which, when conducted with justice, may upon some

occasions answer excellent purposes, as I shall observe in a proper

place.

Had he adopted the first expedient, of ascertaining the value of the

real advance, there was an appearance of justice; because the creditors

were thereby represented as usurers; and by repaying them what they had

advanced, by the enjoyment of an income above the legal interest, he

treated them with more indulgence than the laws allow between private

persons: but when money was borrowed in time of war, a higher interest

should have been allowed for it than in time of peace, when it was to be

paid off; and therefore to take the standard of peace, in reckoning with

the creditors who had lent in time of war, was an evident injustice.

Could he, according to the second scheme, have discovered exactly the

sums which had been paid for the annuities given, and offered

reimbursements upon that footing, less could have been said against it;

because the mentioning more in the contract than what had been paid, was

a palpable fraud against the King.

The third method, which the Cardinal approves of, contains this piece of

great injustice, that the antient creditors of the state who had paid 12

years purchase for their contracts, that is, those who had lent at about

8 _per cent._ might by this scheme be paid off with one half of what

they originally paid. If it be answered, that nothing is worth more than

what it can bring; I answer, that it may be worth more than what it can

bring _at a particular time_. During a war, an annuity which had been

bought at 12 years purchase in time of peace, will fall to five,

providing annuities can then be bought at that rate. The new loans

constantly regulate the value of the old capitals; but upon a return of

peace, they will rise to the original value.

Another injustice here was, that a minister, by borrowing a sum at a

very high interest, at a time he wanted to set a value on the capitals,

might sink this value. And, in the third place, the greatest injustice

of all consisted in this, that the Cardinal had no thoughts of any

reimbursement, as we shall see by what follows.

There was, at this time, one class of annuities constituted at 8 _per

cent._ These he proposed to reduce to 6 _per cent._ as above, by his

preliminary operation. Such annuities sold at that time for five years

purchase. These, says the Cardinal, _we must fix at that value_; and by

allowing the proprietors to enjoy them for 7½ years, the capital and

interest will be paid off.

Other annuities constituted upon the _taille_ sold for six years

purchase, which, by the same rule, were to be paid off in 8½ years.

The annuities and other debts charged at this time upon the _taille_

alone, amounted to 26 millions a year; and by this scheme, the whole was

to be paid off in 8½ years.

Besides these, there were engagements upon other branches of the

revenue, which sold at different prices. All were to be set upon a

proportional footing. The annuities which sold the dearest, were at 7½

years purchase, which were to be paid in 11½ years.

Thus, by the Cardinal’s scheme, the debts of France, which at this time

bore an interest of about 45 millions, were entirely to be paid off, in

about 12 years, without any new imposition; and when that was concluded,

the lands were to be discharged of 26 millions of yearly _taille_, near

two millions sterling, and the King was to have a clear revenue of 53

millions, or about 4 millions of our money, which with the 26 millions

taken off the _taille_, make 79 millions; the total amount of the French

revenue at that time.

I shall now point out the characteristic differences between the

principles upon which the credit of England and France were established,

at the two periods of which we have been speaking.

Had two such writers as Davenant and Richlieu been to be met with in the

same age, and at a time when England and France were engaged in

contracting debts, the contrast would have been stronger; but as it is,

it suits our purpose. The debts contracted in France from 1708, when

credit fell, to the end of the war in 1714, were in consequence of

rapine and extortion, as in Richlieu’s time: and the operations upon

them, after the peace of Utrecht, resemble those of Richlieu in some

very material circumstances. Such as, 1_mo_, That all the debts were

then, by an act of power, put at 4 _per cent._ without any regard to the

original stipulations. 2_do_, That what the Cardinal despaired of

accomplishing, the Regent undertook, and executed, at a great expence to

the King, and with great injustice to many individuals.

He established a commission, called the _visa_, to inquire into the

unfunded debts, which amounted to 600 millions. His intention was, to

discover the effective sums which had been paid for the grounds of debt.

The most favourable classes of these debts consisted in arrears of pay

to the army, indemnities for pillage, and the like, constituted by notes

issued from the office called the _extraordinaires des guerres_, which

were diminished ⅕; the second class was diminished ⅖; the third class ⅗;

and the last of all, sums due to brokers, usurers, &c. were diminished

⅘.

But alas! there was not the least shadow of justice in this operation;

because long before the _visa_ was established, most of the grounds of

those debts had circulated from hand to hand, under the greatest

discredit: so that the real sufferers were then beyond the reach of the

indemnity offered; and the usurers and brokers who had bought them up,

were those who made fortunes by them. The Cardinal’s plan of paying at

the selling price, would have proved, _in this particular case_, more

rational, and more according to equity, than any other: so greatly do

circumstances influence our decisions in all political matters!

By the _visa_, the 600 millions were reduced to 250 millions, and put at

4 _per cent._ like all the other debts. No plan was proposed at first

for paying off the capitals; but a sum was appropriated, though very ill

paid, for discharging the interest. We have discussed sufficiently the

famous operations of the Missisippi; by which an attempt was made to

throw the whole national debt on the company of the Indies; and we have

seen how it succeeded.

The distance, therefore, of Richlieu’s time, from Davenant’s, occasions

very little deception in comparing the principles of French and English

credit: and when we come to examine the present state of that question,

I am afraid we shall find, in France, enough of the old system still

remaining, to verify my observation, that the French have the advantage

in paying their debts; the English, in contracting them. Where the

balance of advantage may lie, will be the subject of more speculation.

The first essential difference I find between the credit of France and

that of England, in the two periods we are considering, relates to the

_coin_. In the first, the value of _it_ had been very well preserved: no

considerable alteration had been made upon _it_, from 1602 to 1636, that

the Cardinal raised the denomination of the marc of fine silver, from 22

livres to 27 livres 10 sols, as has been said. Whereas from the

revolution, until the establishment of the bank in 1695, the _coin_ had

suffered in England a debasement, from clipping, of near 50 _per cent._

This circumstance, more than any other, affected the credit of England,

and increased the expence of King William’s war. In Richlieu’s time,

circulation and trade had made more progress in France than in England

at the time Davenant lived. The revenue left by Henry the Fourth was

double to that of England at the revolution: and, in general, the income

of the Kings of France had far exceeded that of the Kings of England,

for many reigns before that of the great Henry. Borrowing also, upon a

fixed and permanent interest, had been known in France so far back as

Francis the First.

That Prince was the first, I find, who contracted a regular debt, at

perpetual interest, upon the town-house of Paris, at about 8 _per cent._

when the legal interest in England, under his contemporary Henry the

Eighth, was 10 _per cent._

The predecessor of Francis, Louis XII. had of gross revenue, charged

with his debts, which eat up near one half, above 2,500,000_l._

sterling. Dutot, Reflex. Pol. Vol. I. p. 204. Francis I. left to his

successor in 1546, a gross revenue of 2,685,314_l._ sterling, and of

nett income 2,287,998_l._ according to Dutot and M. de Sulli.

Under Henry II. and Francis II. the gross revenue stood at about

2,618,000_l._ sterling.

Under Charles the IXth, I have not been able to discover any thing which

can be relied upon: but his successor Henry III. according to Sulli,

had, in 1581, a revenue of 3,250,000_l._ sterling, and left only about

16 millions of livres of debt, which was no great sum.

To this Henry IV. succeeded; and by the capacity and unwearied

application of his great minister M. de Sulli, it was raised to above

six millions sterling, at the beginning of the reign of Louis XIII. This

revenue, by his wars and expences, was left greatly incumbered; but

still the taxes were established which brought it in; and so early in

the reign of his successor Louis XIV. as the year 1683, his revenue

extended to no less than 9,182,914_l._ sterling, according to Dutot.

Reflex. Pol. Vol. II. p. 256[22].

Footnote 22:

These sums are all converted into sterling, according to the value of

the French livre at the different periods here mentioned.

Let any man, acquainted in the least with the history of England,

examine the fixed revenue there, under Henry VII. and VIII. Edward,

Mary, and Elizabeth, and their successors, down to the revolution; and

they will evidently see the great disproportion of wealth, proceeding

from taxes, in the one and the other kingdom.

From these facts I conclude, that debts and taxes in France were much

more familiarly known in Richlieu’s time, than possibly they could be in

England when Davenant wrote.

Public credit had long grown up in that kingdom, under the hard

influence of regal power: whereas in this it had sprung up lately, under

the protection of liberty, and a most limited authority.

To that cause I ascribe the difference we find between the principles of

English and French credit; and to an effect similar to the cause I

ascribe the gigantic steps by which Britain has outstripped her powerful

rival in the establishment of her credit, since the beginning of this

century.

It is folly to prophecy, I know; but I may be allowed to conjecture,

that the same causes which have raised the credit of this nation to such

an amazing height, will either force the French from their old

principles, or they will, some time or other, bury her credit in the

dust.

Had one half of the acts of power been exerted with us, which have been

so familiar in France: had half the liberties been taken, in tampering

with the claims of creditors; a total bankruptcy would long ere now have

been the consequence: but in Britain credit is young; and has been

tenderly reared. In France she is old, and has been accustomed for many

ages to rougher usage. But example works wonderful effects, especially

when nations live together in this great European society; and the

advantages of a security to be depended on will every day more and more

engage the money’d interest to prefer this to any violent and precarious

profits.

How nicely does not Davenant employ political arithmetic, in order to

make true estimates of the taxes to be imposed, and appropriated for a

term of years, for extinguishing principal and interest? How exactly has

not the account between the state and the bank been carried on from

1695, to this day? How faithfully have not all parliamentary engagements

been observed? When, in 1749, a most natural operation was performed, to

reduce the interest of the debt of Great Britain, by gentle steps, from

4 to 3 _per cent._ what an outcry did it not make, although an

alternative was left to the creditors, either to receive an actual

reimbursement, or to accept of the new terms? The credit of Great

Britain must have appeared to France in the light of a pettish child,

educated in the house of a too indulgent parent: her own is not treated

with such gentleness; and when our money-jobbers try their hand at

Paris, and meet with disappointments from unexpected acts of council; to

prevent the laugh going against them, for trusting to the credit of

France, they turn it off by a jest, and pretend that they were only

playing as at the Groom-Porter’s, or in Change-Alley.

In a word, what would totally ruin the credit of England, does not

equally affect that of France. An act of power there, no doubt, throws a

damp upon it for a time; and if that act of power takes place at a

critical juncture, it may cost her very dear; as it has lately cost her

the continent of North America; which, I think, was sold for 32

millions, withheld from her creditors, for a short time, in the end of

1759. But this act of power, and many others since, have not ruined the

credit of France: many trust her still; only those who purchase in her

funds, at present, take about 2 _per cent._ off from their interest, as

a premium for the insurance of her good faith, until she recovers her

mercantile reputation[23].

Footnote 23:

Money invested in the French funds, _anno_ 1766, will bring the

purchaser 6 _per cent._ This I consider as 4 _per cent._ for the

interest, and 2 _per cent._ premium for the risk; and were she now to

borrow any considerable sums, I suppose the insurance would rise in

proportion.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHAP. V.

_Of the present state of public Credit in Great Britain._

We have, in a preceeding chapter, given a general view of the state of

public credit in England, at the end of the last century. In this, I

shall briefly run through the most remarkable revolutions, both in

sentiments and events, which have succeeded since that time.

At the revolution the revenue of England was about two millions

sterling, affected by two debts. The first was called the bankers debt,

contracted by Charles II. and, by letters patent, charged upon his

hereditary excise, to the amount of upwards of 1 300 000_l._ This debt

was reduced to one half, in the last years of King William, and put at 6

_per cent._ perpetual annuity, to commence from 1706. The other was a

debt of 60,000_l._ due to that Prince’s servants, neglected to be paid

by his successor, and discharged after the revolution.

At the peace of Ryswick, the national debt amounted to about 20

millions. The branches of taxes subsisting at the revolution, and

continued till then, produced no more than about 800,000_l_.; but by

additional taxes laid on in the reign of King William, the whole revenue

extended to 3 355 499_l._ of which above one million was to cease before

1700, as has been said. This reduced the revenue, at the beginning of

Queen Anne’s reign, to nearly what it had been at the revolution: out of

which if we deduct the interest of the national debt then subsisting,

and the expence of the civil list, we shall discover the extent of the

funds prepared for engaging in the war with France; and then by

comparing the state of the nation at her succession, with what it was at

her death, we shall form a general notion of the progress of credit,

debts and taxes in England during that period.

The revenue of England at the accession of

Queen Anne may be stated at about £2 272 000

The debts subsisting on the 31st of

December 1701, were £6 748 780

—————————

Upon which the annual interest was 566 165

Queen Anne’s civil list[24] 600 000

—————————

Which two sums amounting to 1 166 165

Being deducted from the revenue, there will remain ——————————

for the current service of the state 1 105 835

Footnote 24:

The Queen got from parliament 700,000l. for her civil list; but she

immediately ordered 100,000l. to be annually paid to the uses of the

war.

What the exact amount of the revenue of England was at the death of the

Queen, I cannot justly say. But as it may be comprehended under the

three general branches of customs, excises, and other inland duties, we

may form a guess at it, though imperfectly I allow, from the number of

articles in each.

At her accession, the customs comprehended fifteen articles; at her

death they amounted to thirty-seven: at her accession, the excises

comprehended ten articles; at her death, they amounted to twenty-seven:

at her accession, the other inland duties comprehended eight articles;

at her death, they amounted to sixteen, including the land tax, then

become in a manner perpetual, although laid on from year to year.

At her accession, the public debts amounted (as above) to near seven

millions, at her death they exceeded fifty millions.

In fourteen years, from the revolution to her accession, the money

granted by parliament, partly raised on the subject, and partly

borrowed, or taken credit for, according to the custom of the times,

amounted to above fifty-five millions. During the 13 years of Queen

Anne, the money granted by parliament raised on the subject, or borrowed

as above, amounted to upwards of 80 millions.

By this general sketch I do not mean to enter into exact details: facts

must be sought for in books which treat of facts; our chief object is to

examine the principles upon which the public credit was supported, let

the exact sum of money raised be what it will.

The expences of the French war first engaged the nation to revive those

taxes which had been suppressed; and to impose many others for a

considerable number of years, in proportion to the money borrowed upon

them, according to the principles of the former reign.

In 1702, interest was so low, that government got money at 5 _per cent._

It continued so till 1704, when some loans began to be made at 6 _per

cent._ and at this rate it stood during the war.

But in 1706, the exigencies of government were far greater than what all

the money to be borrowed, or raised on the subject, could supply. This

opened a door to the abuse of paying the growing deficiencies upon the

taxes with exchequer bills, chargeable on distant funds. These fell

constantly to great discount; and the unhappy servants of the state, who

received them in payment, were obliged to dispose of them to people who

could wait for an usurious reimbursement by parliament.

When those exchequer bills had once got into the hands of the monied

people, they had interest with government to engage the bank to

circulate them at 6 _per cent._ interest: but as the funds upon which

they were secured happened at that time, 1706, to be engaged for

discharging debts previously contracted, the bank, during that interval,

could receive no payment of this interest of 6 _per cent._ so the

expedient fallen upon, was to pay the bank compound interest for all the

tallies and bills they were to discount, until the funds appropriated

should be relieved.

This expedient, bad as it was, and burdensome to the state in the

highest degree, proved of infinite service, both in establishing the

credit of exchequer bills, and relieving those who received payment in

them.

This operation was quite similar to those of banks of circulation upon

mortgage. The bank of England was here employed in converting into money

exchequer bills, secured upon the faith of government. Banks upon

mortgage convert into money the property of individuals, upon private

security. Had, therefore, banks upon mortgage been established in

England at this time, all those who had property would have got credits

from them, and would have been enabled thereby to pay their taxes, and

carry on their industry, without diminishing their consumption. The

exchequer would then have had no occasion to issue discredited bills and

tallies for making up deficiencies; because taxes would have been

productive, and the state would have been relieved of this excessive

burden of interest at 6 _per cent._ accumulated quarterly in favour of

the bank.

What extraordinary profit must have accrued to the bank by this

operation, every one must perceive. They were not here procuring funds

to lend at a great expence; all they did was to augment the quantity of

their paper upon government security; which they knew well would be

suspended in the common circle of payments within the country; and the

public borrowings were sufficient to furnish credit for the sums sent

out of the country. In this view we may conclude, that almost the whole

accumulated interest paid, was pure profit to the bank, and a great

augmentation of the national debt.

This operation of the bank in 1706, did not prevent subsequent

deficiencies, in the payment of the navy, army, ordnance, and of many

other articles. In 1710, they amounted to above nine millions sterling.

This was too great a sum to be borrowed; and the bank durst not venture

to discount more than what domestic circulation could suspend: so that

after this great debt had circulated upon the discredited obligations

which had been issued for it, and in that way had fallen again into the

hands of monied people, at 30 and 40 _per cent._ below par, the new

proprietors of it were all incorporated into one great company, with a

governor and directors, who got 6 _per cent._ for the whole capital,

with an allowance of 8000_l._ a year for charges of management.

Thus all the real creditors for these deficiencies lost the discount;

the monied people gained it, and the public paid for all.

When credit is in this languid state, every expence of government rises

in proportion to the discredit of the paper with which they pay, till at

last the whole sum, with interest, accumulation, and expence, falls upon

the state, as if every farthing of it had been frugally expended in

ready money.

This is a general view of the state of credit in Queen Anne’s reign.

Government had not, as in the former war, the inconveniences flowing

from the disorder in the coin to combat with. These contributed more

than any other circumstance, to raise the capital of the debts at the

peace of Ryswick. Circulation, too, was considerably augmented, in

consequence of the increase of taxes, public debts, and the operation of

the bank in circulating exchequer bills and tallies. Yet money was still

scarce, in comparison of what it might have been, had proper methods

been contrived to preserve it upon a level with the occasions for it.

The incorporation, also, of nine millions capital in the hands of a

corporation, which afterwards was called the South Sea Company, was an

assistance to public credit, by increasing a monied interest, the

principal view of which was to fill the government loans, on the

lucrative conditions offered for them. And last of all, the strictly

adhering to the public faith of engagements, without seeking, by acts of

power, to indemnify the state for the losses it had been obliged to

incur, from the circumstances of the times, laid the solid basis of

national credit for the future.

Although the many additional taxes added to the former revenue, did not

increase it in any proportion to the load laid upon the subject during

this war, they served, however, as a good foundation for improvement, as

soon as the effects of peace restored them to their full production. But

the charges laid upon them having become every year greater, government

was obliged to engage certain funds for thirty two years to come, and

sometimes longer; and many branches of taxes, which formerly had been

granted for short terms, were then made perpetual. After the peace of

Utrecht, the expences of the state were greatly diminished, and money

began to regorge: so that in the year 1716, the first foundation of the

sinking fund was laid, by opening a subscription for paying off about

ten or eleven millions sterling, at that time, charged upon several

branches of taxes, the produce of which amounted annually to 724 849_l._

sterling.

The proprietors of these debts were allowed to subscribe into this new

fund, at an interest of 5 _per cent._ redeemable by parliament: and in

case the whole subscription should not fill at that rate, the bank and

South Sea company became bound to make it up, upon receiving a like

annuity in proportion to their subscriptions.

The bankers debt, of which we have spoken, the only public debt owing at

the revolution, made part of those which were to be subscribed for.

The taxes which had been appropriated for the discharge of those

capitals, from temporary, were made perpetual; with a clause added, that

when the surplus of the fund, after payment of interest, had discharged

the capitals of all the national debt due the 25th of December in that

year, the whole produce of the fund itself should remain at the disposal

of parliament.

After this first operation in reducing the interest, the bank was

satisfied with a reduction to 5 _per cent._ of that paid to them; and

they began to circulate exchequer bills at a more moderate interest than

formerly.

Public credit was now daily gaining ground. In 1719, the South Sea

company, whose capital was then swelled to eleven millions at 5 _per

cent._ with a sum of 9397_l._ sterling for the expence of management,

enlarged their views; and finding great profits to arise from such a

fund under one administration, formed a project of acquiring a large sum

of the public debts, which remained outstanding upon the original funds

appropriated for them.

For this purpose they proposed to government to acquire, 1. The property

of above 16 millions of redeemable debts, bearing then 4 and 5 _per

cent._ interest; and to reduce the whole to 4 _per cent._ at midsummer

1727. 2. To acquire a sum of 794 000_l._ of annuities upon lives, and

for long terms, as they should agree with the proprietors, at 5 _per

cent._ upon the purchase-money, until 1727; and at 4 _per cent._

afterwards. Annuities were then valued at fourteen and twenty years

purchase, according to their length: they rose, however, during the

operations of the South Sea, to 25 and 30 years purchase. 3. They were

to have a sum added to their former allowance for the charge of

management, in proportion to this augmentation of their stock. 4. That

for the advantage which might follow upon this agreement with

government, they were to pay into the exchequer above seven millions

sterling, toward discharging other national debts outstanding. And in

the last place, they engaged to circulate a considerable sum of

exchequer bills, and to pay the interest of 2 pence _per cent. per

diem_, which should grow upon them during seven years[25].

Footnote 25:

After the long and particular account I have given of the Missisippi,

I shall not enter into a like detail, concerning a scheme which

proceeded upon the very same principles; to wit, the artificial

raising the value of a stock, by promising dividends, out of funds

which were nowise proportioned to them. I shall therefore, in a very

few words, compare some of the operations of the South Sea scheme,

with those of the Missisippi; and in doing it, point out the principal

differences between them.

The great profits upon the Missisippi were expected from the interest

paid by government for the great loan, the farms of the revenue, and

the profits upon their trade.

Those of the South Sea were, at setting out, 1. The profits upon their

trade: 2. The allowance made them: 3. The difference of receiving 5

_per cent._ for the money they laid out in purchasing the public

debts, when money was at 4 _per cent._ as it was when the scheme was

set on foot: and 4. The surplus money subscribed into the stock above

par, in consequence of the artifices used to enhance the value of it.

The seven millions they were to pay to the state, seemingly for no

value received, were a sort of compensation for receiving the 5 _per

cent._ for 7 years, at a time when money was worth no more than 4 _per

cent._

These advantages raised, at first, the value of the original stock of

eleven millions. The consequence was, that the proprietors of the 16

millions of the redeemable debts, which were to be bought in when they

came to subscribe their capitals into the new stock, transacted them

at a proportional discount; which discount, being good against the

government in favour of the company, served to discharge

proportionally the seven millions the company was to pay. This gave an

additional value to the stock; and so it rose, greatly indeed above

that proportion. Then the company promised a dividend of 10 _per

cent._ for one half year, upon their capital, at midsummer 1720; this

dividend was to be paid in stock, which was constantly rising in its

value; but no information was ever given the public concerning the

funds which were to produce this dividend; so every one concluded that

there were hidden treasures in their hands, which enabled them to

promise such large dividends. Accordingly, stock rose from 300 _per

cent._ to 375; then to 400, and at last to 1000 _per cent._; and in

proportion as it rose, the wealth of the former subscribers augmented

from the surplus above par, paid by the latter, and those who

subscribed last, bore all the loss upon the blowing up of the scheme.

But one great difference between the South Sea and Missisippi, was

this: That in France there was abundance of money in the hands of the

public, for purchasing the actions, at the exorbitant price to which

they rose; but in England there was not: consequently, in France, the

rate of interest fell to 2 _per cent._ and in England, the great

demand for money to borrow, raised it beyond all bounds.

Those who subscribed in money, paid down no more than 10 _per cent._

at subscribing; but became bound to pay up the remainder. But when the

stock tumbled, people were better pleased to lose the 10 _per cent._

they had paid, than to pay up the remaining 90 _per cent._ according

to the terms at subscribing. Those indeed who subscribed their former

capitals at a vast discount, did not labour under the same

inconvenience of want of money; but that discount became as real a

loss to _them_, as the cash subscribed became a loss to the money

subscribers, the moment that those who were in the secret, and who, by

the most infamous chain of artifices, had blown up the public frenzy,

began to realize and sell out, and that the whole was discovered to be

a cheat. So that upon the whole, the English scheme had much less

foundation than the French. The first blew up from an absolute

necessity, and for want of any bottom at all; the last from

misconduct, and rather from folly than knavery. I return to an account

of the scheme.

The original capital of the South Sea company, was 11 750 000_l._: the

redeemable debts they were to purchase in, amounted to 16 750 000_l._;

and the value of the irredeemable, or what were called the _absolute

terms_, was computed at 15 058 000_l._ together 31 808 000_l._

sterling.

The proprietors of this original capital of 11 750 000_l._ consulted

their own advantage only, in purchasing in this large sum of debts,

which were to be converted into additional stock; and therefore

sounded very high the great advantages of such a transformation of

them; 1_mo_, From the profits of the trade, which they were to enjoy

exclusively. And, 2_do_, From the great addition to their wealth, from

the constant rising in the price of their stock. They carried their

views to nothing less than obtaining a majority in the house of

commons, by the weight of their wealth, and of becoming the absolute

rulers of the nation.

The public being from the beginning intoxicated with such ideas,

subscriptions for stock were opened at 200 _per cent._ above par; and

some of the proprietors of the 31 808 000_l._ subscribed at first

their capitals at a proportional discount; that is, they made over a

debt of 100_l._ for 33⅓ in South Sea stock; and successively, the

subscription rose to 1000 _per cent._ These immense profits being

incorporated into the gains of the general stock, were proportionally

shared by the subscribers themselves, who became proprietors; and the

higher the stock rose, the more these gains augmented. This influenced

the infatuation; and the dividends augmenting in proportion to the

price of subscription, there appeared no end of the rising of the

stock.

The first dividend offered, as has been said, was 10 _per cent._

half-yearly, in stock: this was afterwards converted into no less than

30 _per cent._ in money, for that half-year: and when stock rose to

1000, a dividend of no less than 50 _per cent. per annum_, in money,

was promised for twelve years to come.

Had stock risen to 2000 _per cent._ the dividend could have as easily

been carried to 100 _per cent. per annum_, as it had been to 50 _per

cent._ when at 1000.

But whence was this dividend to be paid? The company and the directors

took good care never to give to the public any light as to that

particular.

To prevent, therefore, such abuses in the rising of the South Sea, it

ought to have been provided by parliament, that in taking in

subscriptions, and offering dividends, the directors should have

informed the public, 1_mo_, Of the money owing to them by government.

2_do_, Of the money gained by the subscriptions above par. And 3_tio_,

Of the profits upon their trade. And, on the other hand, of the debts

due by them; and of the nett balance upon their books, in their

favour.

This would have been fair dealing. But to pretend the necessity of

secrecy, in a point where a nation is interested, was in itself a mere

pretext; and had it been otherwise, it might have been answered, that

a company which is obliged to have recourse to such secrets, ought to

be prevented from dealing with those who were to remain ignorant of

_them_, however deeply interested.

From the operations we have been describing, we perceive, that the point

of view in England, from the peace of Utrecht, has always been to reduce

the interest of the national debt; but never to leave in the hands of

the creditors, any part of the savings made; in order to diminish the

capital. These savings have constantly been thrown into a sinking fund,

_supposed_ to be intended for extinguishing the capital; and were it

employed for that purpose for a few years only, and not diverted to

other uses, I am persuaded the consequence would be, to reduce interest

in England lower than ever perhaps it has been seen in any nation. That

interest may be reduced, by making money regorge in the hands of the

lenders, is, I think, an uncontroverted principle: that by regorging in

France, _anno_ 1720, it reduced interest to 2 _per cent._ is a fact

indisputable. I shall not pretend to say positively, that the total

appropriation of the sinking fund, and an augmentation upon annual

grants, to make up the void, would in Great Britain work this effect in

a few years; but I think it is very probable that it would: and if the

domestic creditors, in any state, where debts, _due to strangers_, are

swelled to such a height as to exceed the whole profits made upon trade,

shall by their influence, and from a motive of present advantage,

obstruct a scheme of this nature; the consequence will prove, in the

first place, to discourage, and then totally to extinguish commerce, and

in a little time to occasion an unavoidable bankruptcy; as shall be

farther explained in a succeeding chapter. I return to the South Sea

company.

The proposal of the South Sea company, mentioned above, was accepted of,

and ratified by act of parliament, 6 Geo. I. chap. 4th. But the disaster

which befel credit, in consequence of the ambitious views of those who

were in the administration of that company, prevented the nation from

reaping all the advantages which might have proceeded from it.

The reign of K. George I. though little disturbed by foreign wars,

produced not the smallest diminution upon the capital of the public

debts; and those which subsisted at the peace of Utrecht, stood, at his

death, at 50 354 953_l._ The same taxes subsisted; and every one almost

was by this time made perpetual, except indeed the land tax and malt

duty, which to this day continue to be annual grants.

But alas! this apparent revenue, arising from a multitude of taxes, was

of no use towards defraying the smallest _extraordinary_ expence of

government. Every article of it was engaged for debts; and the

operations for reducing the interest were calculated only to produce a

fund for discharging the capital. The civil list, indeed, that is to

say, the expence of civil government, exclusive of army, navy, ordnance,

and incidental articles, was paid from the permanent taxes, and

considered as a charge upon them. But were not armies and navies then

become as regular an expence upon every state in Europe as judges and

ambassadors? Undoubtedly they were. Yet after the peace of Utrecht, in

laying down the plan which has constantly been followed ever since, for

defraying the regular expence of British government, these two great and

unavoidable expences were considered as contingent only, and provided

for by annual grants: and because armies, in time of peace, in former

reigns, had proved dangerous to liberty from the abuse of power, they

were still considered in the same light, at a time when liberty and

trade were continually threatened from their armed enemies and rivals

abroad.

When the continuance of peace, in the reign of George the First, had

produced the effect of reducing interest, on many occasions, to 3 _per

cent._ the sinking fund began to gather strength. The land tax, from the

year 1722, had not exceeded two shillings in the pound; and the

_extraordinary_ expence of government, according to the annual grants of

the 13 years of his reign, did not exceed 34 800 000_l._ or 2 670

000_l._ a year.

Public tranquillity was very little disturbed during the first twelve

years of the succeeding reign; and all the _extraordinary_ expence did

not much exceed three millions _per annum_: yet that expence, small as

it was, compared with what it has been since, was almost every year made

out, by taking one million at least from the sinking fund; and in the

years of the least expence, such as 1731 and 1732, the land tax was

reduced to one shilling in the pound, at the expence of taking two

millions and a half from the sinking fund.

These steps of administration I neither censure, or approve of. I must

suppose every statesman to have good reasons for doing what he does,

unless I can discover that his motives are bad. May not the landed

interest, who composed the parliament, have insisted upon such a

diminution of their load? May not the proprietors of the public debts

have insisted on their side, that no money out of the sinking fund

should be thrown into their hands, while the bank was making loans upon

the land and malt duties at 3 _per cent._? Might not the people have

been averse to an augmentation of taxes? When three such considerable

interests concur in a scheme, which in its ultimate, though distant

consequences, must end in the notable prejudice of perpetuating the

debts, although opportunities offer to diminish them, what can

government do? They must submit; and which is worse, they cannot well

avow their reasons.

Such combinations must occur, and frequently too, in every state loaded

with debts, where the body of the people, the landlords, and the

creditors, find an advantage in the non-payment of the national debt. It

is for this reason that I imagine, the best way to obviate the bad

consequences of so strong an influence in parliament, would be, to

appropriate the amount of all sinking funds in such a manner, as to put

it out of a nation’s power to misapply them, and by this force them

either to retrench their extraordinary expences, or to impose taxes for

defraying them.

The second period of George IId’s reign, was from the breaking out of

the Spanish war in 1739, to the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748. During

these ten years, (1748 being included) the extraordinary expence was,

upon an average, very near seven millions; and at the end of the year

1738, the public debts amounted to 46 661 767_l._ bearing 1 962 053_l._

interest.

The first expedient for borrowing money during the war, was to continue

the duty on salt for seven years; and to mortgage it at once for 1 200

000_l._ according to the old plan. To this was added, the expedient of

lotteries, and loans upon indeterminate annuities, according to the

current value of money.

An additional excise upon spirituous liquors, brought in wherewithal to

compensate these additional sums of interest; and the East India

company, for lending one million at 3 _per cent._ upon this occasion,

had their charter continued from 1766 to 1780. This operation I also

consider as an anticipation; and as it was to commence at the distance

of 23 years from the time of the grant, could not fail of being very

burdensome to the nation, however convenient it might be at that

particular time.

Were the India company now, 1766, to purchase the renewal of their

charter for 14 years, what a sum might be expected from it! Yet the

value given for the grant they then obtained did not exceed 30 000_l._

because the other annuities of 3 _per cent._ were sold at that time for

97_l._ or, in the language of the funds, at 3_l._ premium for every

100_l._ subscribed; and this so early in the war as 1743.

The practice of borrowing upon premiums had taken place in Queen Anne’s

reign, and has of late years been very common. The credit of Great

Britain is so firmly established, that in whatever way government

inclines to borrow, the money’d men are willing to lend, provided the

loan be made at the then rate of interest.

To avoid therefore the establishment of funds at different rates, in

proportion to the fluctuations of money, the bargain is made at one

determinate interest. Suppose, for an example, 3 _per cent._ Then,

according as it is found to rise above that rate in the market, a

premium is paid out of the money subscribed; as in this case 3_l._ was

paid out of the 100_l._ subscribed; that is, the subscriber retained it,

and obtained his 3_l._ annuity, for the payment of 97_l._ so this

remained a 3 _per cent._ loan, instead of being, as it really was, at

39⁄97 _per cent._ and was sold and transferred as every other 3 _per

cent._ without occasioning any perplexity.

As the war continued, interest rose, from the demand for money, when the

supplies became deficient.

The year following, viz. 1744, this manifested itself, by the conditions

offered by government, which were: That, of two millions to be borrowed

at 3 _per cent._ as before, upon the whole sum, 1 500 000_l._ should be

formed into perpetual annuities, and the remaining 500 000_l._ into a

lottery, consisting of 50,000 tickets, to be sold at 10_l._ each. The

original subscribers to this loan subscribed therefore 10_l._ for the

ticket, and 30_l._ for the annuity, in all 40_l._; for which they were

to receive 3 _per cent._ But the premium consisted in this; that every

subscriber for 10 tickets, that is, 400_l._ of the total fund, had an

annuity for life given to him of 4_l._ 10_s._

This made five thousand annuities on lives, of 4_l._ 10_s._ each, or 22

500_l._ a year to be added to the interest of 3 _per cent._ on the two

millions, that is, to 60 000_l._ a year of perpetual annuities. So that

the whole loan of two millions this year cost government 82 500_l._ of

interest, or 4⅛ _per cent._; 22 500_l._ of which was to extinguish with

the lives of the subscribers.

Now, if we suppose these life-annuities worth 20 years purchase[26],

this was the same thing as if government had given a deduction of 90_l._

out of the 400_l._ subscribed; consequently the remainder, which was

310_l._ produced 12_l._ This makes the rate of interest upon the loan to

have been 3.87 _per cent._ And as government inclined that the loan

should be made in that way, the lenders were willing that it should be

so; and the difference between 3.87 _per cent._ (the then rate of money)

and 4⅛ interest, which was paid by government, was a sinking fund, as it

were, for the gradual extinction of the capital of the lottery for

500,000_l._ during the lives of the annuitants.

An Inquiry into the Principles of Political Oeconomy (Vol. 2 of 2) Being an essay on the science of domestic policy in free nations. In which are particularly considered population, agriculture, trade, industry, money, coin, interest, circulation, banks, exchange, public credit, and taxes · 第 11 / 16 章