_What is termed liberality in princes, is for the most part injurious to
their subjects._
XXIII. I consider liberality, not only as a virtue, but as a most noble
one, that is so much the more worthy to be treasured up in the breast of
a man, by so much the more his station of life is exalted. It is certain,
that although all vices are vile and base, and all virtues noble, there
are vices, which in an especial manner deserve to be stigmatized with the
epithet of sordid, and that there are virtues, which shine forth with a
superior splendor and dignity. Among the first sort, avarice should be
classed, and among the second, liberality.
XXIV. From hence it may be inferred, that avarice, which is always a vile
quality, in princes, is a superlatively vile one, as this meanness of
spirit, is unworthy of the elevated dignity of a throne. Vespasian was a
prince of admirable endowments, he was a great warrior, politician, and
magistrate, and was besides temperate, discreet, and affable; but his
avarice was a dark shade, which obscured all these perfections; so that
the most a person can do who reads his history, is not to abhor him, but
he never can bring himself to esteem or love him. He, to increase his
revenues and fill his coffers, went to the extreme length, of laying a
tax on the excrements of the human body; but the matter out of which the
tax arose, was not so noisome and stinking, as the tax itself.
XXV. Although, it does not follow from hence, that prodigality, which
is a vice diametrically opposite to avarice, is not a great blemish in
princes; for in truth, it is more blameable in them than in private
people. A private prodigal, wastes his own substance; a prince, the
substance of other men. A private person by his extravagance, hurts
himself; a sovereign, by his, injures a whole community; so that,
although the two vices are unlike in themselves, when centered in
princes, they produce with respect to the public, the same effects.
The avaricious prince impoverishes his people to enrich himself; and
the prodigal one, impoverishes himself to enrich others. What the first
heaps up, is buried; what the other amasses together, is dissipated; and
by attending closely to this object, you will find, that prodigality is
the most pernicious vice of the two; because what a prodigal sovereign
squanders in needless largesses to enrich particular people, does not
return, or if ever it does, it is very late, or it is by some rare
accident, that it ever returns again to the public stock; whereas what
an avaricious prince hoards up, may be serviceable in the days of his
successor, and may greatly contribute to lessen the burdens of his
subjects.
XXVI. But how shall we define what should be termed prodigality in
princes? Why by calling all that such, which is commonly stiled
liberality. The vulgar, and even those who are superior to the vulgar,
allow of a large extension, to the arbitrary and voluntary expences of
princes. It is commonly understood, that when a prince from caprice,
or from particular affections for a subject, makes him a present, that
the donation should be proportioned to the power and grandeur of the
person who bestows it; but I consider the thing in quite a different
light. Whatever considerable sum of the public money is expended, which
is not laid out, directly or indirectly, to advance the public benefit,
is injustice and profusion. That which comes out of the pockets of the
public, should be expended in such things as are beneficial to the
public. Would it not be most unjust providence, to apply, for the sake
of indulging the caprice or ostentation of a sovereign, that which is
contributed by millions of people, to enrich a particular person, who by
some chance accident, in a matter that was of little importance to the
community, has done something that was agreeable to, and that has gained
him the favour of his prince?
XXVII. Alexander ordered his treasurer to give to the philosopher
Anaxarchus, any sum of money he should desire. He requested a hundred
talents; and the treasurer informed Alexander of the excessive demand of
the philosopher; to which Alexander answered, _he has done very right,
for he well knows that he has a friend who is both able and willing
to give him that sum_; and ordered the treasurer to pay him the money
immediately. Is this liberality? It is true, that it is celebrated as
such in an infinite number of books; but I say, that it was no such
thing, for that it should rather have been termed mad prodigality,
which is the legitimate child of vain-glory; and that it was not only
prodigality, but cruelty and tyranny. With those hundred talents,
he might have administered to many distresses; and if a prince has
superfluities, he should lay them out for such purposes. But refraining
to administer to the hunger and necessities of numbers of poor people,
to satiate the gluttonous cravings of an avaricious philosopher, was
a glaring act of partiality, which rendered it doubtful, which of the
two was the most unjust person, Anaxarchus for demanding such a sum, or
Alexander for gratifying him in his demand.
XXVIII. The same Alexander, being requested by his friend Perilus to
furnish him with a sum of money to portion out his daughters, ordered
fifty talents to be delivered to him. To which Perilus modestly replied,
that ten would be sufficient; to this Alexander answered, _that is not
a matter for my consideration, for although ten talents would be as
much as would answer your purpose, it would not be a present suitable
to my grandeur_. I find this celebrated by many writers, as a noble and
magnanimous act, and Alexander’s saying upon doing it, as a commendable
and a well-pointed one; but in my opinion, the act was an act of madness,
and that his saying upon doing it, was a very weak and trifling one.
Does the grandeur of a prince consist in extravagances and profusions?
Does it display grandeur, to take from many what is absolutely needful
for them, to furnish a few others with superfluities? It does not,
but rather favours of injustice, baseness, and tyranny; and they only
can call such behaviour magnanimous, who have lost the use of their
understanding.
XXIX. A thousand crowns in specie, were one day presented to Don Alfonso,
the fifth king of Arragon of that name, and the first of Naples. A person
who was standing by at the time, said, _How happy it would make me, if
all that money was mine!_ To which the king answered, _Take it then,
for I am desirous of making you happy._ Was this magnanimity? I know
that it has been cried up as such; but I say, it rather shewed weakness
of mind, and a want of proper resolution, to resist an absurd impulse
of vain-glory. I suppose also, that it was from the want of thinking
or reflexion, that the king was guilty of that profusion, and that he
was hurried into it by his vanity, which suggested to him, that making
the man a present of the money would blazon his fame, and manifest to
the world, that he had both the disposition and the power to make a man
happy. But I would ask him (and this is a question that might be put
to all the princes in the world) whether, if it is an act of greatness
to make one man happy, it is not a much superior one to make a great
many so? If it is glorious in a sovereign to make an individual happy,
is it not beyond comparison more glorious, to make a whole nation so?
And there is no doubt but this might be done, if a prince would avoid
all profusion, and regulate his conduct by a discreet œconomy; if he
would curtail all superfluous expences, be a check upon the avarice of
his ministers, or else deliver the administration of his affairs into
the hands of none but men of integrity, who are capable of proportioning
the contributions to be paid by his subjects to their abilities, and who
should be careful, not to over-burthen the husbandmen and manufacturers;
for these are the people, who by their labours, are the principal
instruments of enriching a state, and whenever they find the weight of
the taxes, squeeze out of them the greatest part of their earnings,
they will leave off work, and betake themselves to an idle and vagabond
life. To sum up the whole, a prince, by conforming to the precepts that
are dictated by justice, religion, and prudence, and by not bestowing
on any one in particular, more than his necessities demand, or than is
due to his merits, will become the common father of his people; and by
extending his paternal care, and dispensing his generosity with an equal
and impartial hand to them all alike, will be able to make them all happy.
XXX. The royal treasury, may be compared to the ocean. It receives its
pecuniary contributions from all the monies in the kingdom, as the ocean
does its stock of waters from all the rivulets, fountains, and streams
in the whole world. The royal treasury then, should do by the kingdom,
as the ocean does by the world; that is, after permitting those waters
to be exhaled in vapours, return the same stock in refreshing rains,
to fertilize the earth. It would argue a great defect in the sovereign
providence, as the stock of the ocean is supplied by all the waters
of the world, if he was only to permit a return of them, to fertilize
here and there a district, in consequence of which, all the rest would
become barren. Just so, would it be an intolerable absurdity in human
government, to apply the money of the public treasury, to which the
whole kingdom has contributed, in prodigal donations to enrich a few
individuals, and by with-holding it from all the rest, leaving them in
distress and misery.
XXXI. The reigning emperor of China at the beginning of this century,
was with respect to the matter we are treating of, one of the greatest
examples, that ever has, or perhaps ever will be exhibited to the world.
I rely on the authority of Father Contanein for the truth of this
assertion, and on the account he gives of this emperor in his letters,
which are dated at Canton the latter end of the year 1725, and which are
copied into the 18th volume of edifying and curious letters of foreign
missionaries; but I only at present, have before me an extract from them,
which is inserted in the second volume of the Memoirs of Trevoux of the
year 1728.
XXXII. That prince, laboured incessantly to promote the good of his
subjects. The object absorbed all his thoughts, and occupied his whole
attention. Every day of the year, and all hours of the day, were days and
hours of giving audience and expediting business; and he scarce devoted
any to amusement or recreation. To provide for the conveniences of his
own person, he used the riches of his treasury with great moderation; but
he expended them with a truly royal magnificence, when he administered to
the necessities of his people. He procured punctual information, of the
state and condition of all his provinces, and took care to know, which
of them was opulent, and which indigent; this he did, to the end, that he
might succour with the greater ease, such of them as were in distress. If
any town had been desolated, either by an earthquake or a conflagration,
if any province had suffered by an inundation, or by any adverse
accidents, had been prevented from yielding their usual produce, or if
by any other chain of accidents, a province happened to be impoverished,
he immediately remitted large sums, to repair their buildings, and to
relieve their poor. All his subjects experienced to flow from his bowels,
a balsam of tenderness, compassion, and paternal love, which healed all
their calamities, and relieved all their distresses.
XXXIII. In the same year, 1725, some provinces suffered greatly
from excessive rains, and the emperor took measures to relieve the
distresses that had been occasioned by them, which, in order to do
more effectually, he sent instructions written in his own hand, to the
principal men and mandarines of all his empire, which began thus; _This
summer, extraordinary and uncommon quantities of rain have fallen, and
the provinces of Pekin, Chantong, and Honan, have been inundated by
them. I feel much for the distresses of my people who inhabit those
provinces; and have it much at heart to relieve them. Their afflictions
are continually present to my imagination both night and day, nor can I
enjoy sound sleep, or tranquillity of mind, while I know that my subjects
suffer; and as it is absolutely necessary to send immediate relief to
those vast numbers of poor distressed people, I command you great men and
magistrates of my empire, to choose some trusty and able persons, such
as are capable of executing my instructions, and who prefer the public
good to their own private interests; and dispatch them to the three
before-named provinces, to distribute to the afflicted inhabitants of
them, the tokens of my benevolence and compassion. Let them scrutinize
the most obscure and remote corners, to find out all the poor and
distressed, to the end, that no one may remain without proper succour
and relief. I know that it has sometimes happened, that in the making
these sort of distributions, acts of injustice and partiality have been
committed; but I will take care that the conduct of those you send shall
be watched, and do you look to it also._
XXXIV. There is another testimony in the before recited letter, which
does honour, not only to the generosity and benevolence of this prince,
but to his heroic disinterestedness also. It having been customary with
him for a great many years, to release a certain province from paying
a part of their annual tribute; which he did because he thought it was
just and necessary. The inhabitants, to express their gratitude for this
kindness and generosity to them, meditated erecting some monuments to
his honour, and had actually begun the work, which the governor of the
province informed him of. To which information of the governor’s, the
emperor gave the following answer: _What you acquaint me with, is totally
disagreeable to me, and what I by no means approve. When I conceded this
grace to the inhabitants of the province you preside over, I had no other
motive or view in doing it, than that of acting justly by, and making all
my subjects happy alike; but had no intention of procuring to myself a
vain honour. Such expences are superfluous and unnecessary, and can never
be of any use or benefit to me; and as I have sent proclamations through
all my empire, exhorting my people to practise frugality and œconomy, I
wonder how they could presume to think of running into these needless and
mad expences, or how you could permit them to do it: it is also to be
apprehended, that the inferior officers who are generally the collectors
of money for these purposes, may be tempted to put part of it into their
own pockets. Prohibit therefore immediately, the proceeding any further
in this matter, and with respect to the edifice and monument of stone,
I forbid the erecting of it; and I repeat again, that when I do these
acts of grace and favour, it is not with a view of acquiring a vain
reputation, but because I think it just and necessary; and to the end,
that every one may be enabled to do his duty in society, and that the
tranquillity and happiness of my subjects in general may be established
on a solid foundation._
XXXV. All the conduct of this prince was of the same tenor. He with a
most sagacious penetration, attended to the proceedings and conduct
of all the mandarines; and gave them instructions, that they should
apprize him of all that occurred to them, which might conduce to promote
good government. He made many regulations, that were just and wise;
he established premiums for the husbandmen, who had distinguished
themselves by their industry, and the improvements they had made in
agriculture; and for the manufacturers and mechanics, who had signalized
themselves by their diligence and ingenuity; he made provision for the
widows of virtuous citizens, and settled rewards that were to be paid
to such children, as distinguished themselves by their filial care of,
and tenderness to their aged parents, &c. and is this Prince who was
so perfect in his morals, and so great a pattern of policy, the same
man, who proscribed Christianity throughout all his dominions? I fear
we must be obliged to answer in the affirmative, and to contemplate
with astonishment, the inscrutable secrets of the divine Providence;
and to exclaim, _Oh! how incomprehensible are God’s judgments, and how
untraceable are his ways!_ But the blindness of this emperor in matters
of religion, should not preclude our recommending him as a signal
pattern, of that sort of œconomy and liberality which should be practised
by princes.
XXXVI. I have said of the _œconomy and liberality_, for both these
virtues, are found to be perfectly compatible with each other, and to be
admirably reconciled together in the practice of that prince. The true
and proper effect, and essential operation of liberality, according to
the doctrine of St. Thomas, consists, in proportioning our affection
for money in such a manner, that our excessive love of it shall never
obstruct our laying it out for such purposes, as are just and laudable.
Thus the epithet of liberal, does not belong to him who expends it
to indulge his whim or humour, or from motives of ostentation, or to
gratify his affection for some particular people, he is desirous of
enriching; for all this is prodigality: but he deserves to be called
liberal, who applies money to promote and accomplish virtuous ends, and
who is always ready to part with it, when it may be made conducive to
promote such purposes. There is field enough within these limits, for
the exercise of the virtue of liberality. He is liberal, who succours
the poor, rewards the deserving, supports by generous donations men of
ability, and who constructs useful public edifices, and, in general, all
money that is laid out for the benefit of the public, may be said to
be expended on objects of liberality, which liberality, if judiciously
extended, may be deserving of the epithet of magnificence. These two last
virtues are distinguishable from each other, by the first being limited
not to exceed the bounds of moderation: and the other being permitted
to extend to the expending vast sums, provided the money is laid out
from laudable motives, and on objects, that are really conducive to the
public utility. Thus Louis the Fourteenth did an act of magnificence,
in building the Hospital of Invalids at Paris, and did a much superior
one, by constructing the canal, that makes a navigable communication
between Languedoc and Bourdeaux; because the great expences that attended
executing these works, were incurred to promote the public good, and
actually were great advantages to the public at large; but the palaces
that were built by Nero and Caligula, which occupied as much ground as
two large towns might have stood on, do not deserve to be called works of
magnificence; because the vast sums that were laid out in constructing
them, were by no means expended to promote the public good, but only to
gratify the ostentatious vanity of two profuse men. The emperor Adrian
was magnificent, by forgiving at once, the payment of all that was
owing to him for the sixteen preceding years, by Rome, Italy, and all
the imperial provinces; but Alfonso the Twelfth of Castile was prodigal
(provided the story that is told of him, and circulated in so many books
respecting this matter is true) in expending a vast sum of money, for
the redemption of Baldwin, emperor of Constantinople; as the first case
concerned the whole Roman empire; and Spain was not at all interested in
the last.
XXXVII. Finally, A prince may exercise not only his liberality, but his
magnificence also, by bestowing great donations, upon here and there an
individual of signal and superior merit, (but I would be understood to
mean such merit as has been beneficial to the state) because in doing
this, his attention may be supposed, as not confined to rewarding the
virtue of a single man; but to the exciting the emulation of many. And
considered in this light, what Spain gave to Colon, did not exceed the
bounds of justice and moderation; what she gave to Cortez was little;
and what she gave to the great Captain next to nothing. When a prince or
nation should exercise magnificence, if the donation they bestow is not
equal to the merit of the person it is conferred on, or the dignity of
the party who confers it, it can never deserve to be termed liberality,
for there is no middle way in these cases, and if the gift does not
amount high enough to be deserving of the epithet of magnificence, it
declines to the other extreme, and sinks into parsimony.