第9章

NotwithstandingthetaxesofEnglandamounttoalmostseventeenmillionsayear,saidtobefortheexpensesofGovernment,itisstillevidentthatthesenseoftheNationislefttogovernitself,anddoesgovernitself,bymagistratesandjuries,almostatitsowncharge,onrepublicanprinciples,exclusiveoftheexpenseoftaxes。Thesalariesofthejudgesarealmosttheonlychargethatispaidoutoftherevenue。Consideringthatalltheinternalgovernmentisexecutedbythepeople,thetaxesofEnglandoughttobethelightestofanynationinEurope;insteadofwhich,theyarethecontrary。Asthiscannotbeaccountedforonthescoreofcivilgovernment,thesubjectnecessarilyextendsitselftothemonarchicalpart。

WhenthepeopleofEnglandsentforGeorgetheFirst（anditwouldpuzzleawisermanthanMr。Burketodiscoverforwhathecouldbewanted,orwhatservicehecouldrender）,theyoughtatleasttohaveconditionedfortheabandonmentofHanover。BesidestheendlessGermanintriguesthatmustfollowfromaGermanElectorbeingKingofEngland,thereisanaturalimpossibilityofunitinginthesamepersontheprinciplesofFreedomandtheprinciplesofDespotism,orasitisusuallycalledinEnglandArbitraryPower。AGermanElectorisinhiselectorateadespot;howthencoulditbeexpectedthatheshouldbeattachedtoprinciplesoflibertyinonecountry,whilehisinterestinanotherwastobesupportedbydespotism？

Theunioncannotexist;anditmighteasilyhavebeenforeseenthatGermanElectorswouldmakeGermanKings,orinMr。Burke"swords,wouldassumegovernmentwith"contempt。"TheEnglishhavebeeninthehabitofconsideringaKingofEnglandonlyinthecharacterinwhichheappearstothem;whereasthesameperson,whiletheconnectionlasts,hasahome—seatinanothercountry,theinterestofwhichisdifferenttotheirown,andtheprinciplesofthegovernmentsinoppositiontoeachother。TosuchapersonEnglandwillappearasatown—residence,andtheElectorateastheestate。TheEnglishmaywish,asIbelievetheydo,successtotheprinciplesoflibertyinFrance,orinGermany;butaGermanElectortremblesforthefateofdespotisminhiselectorate;andtheDuchyofMecklenburgh,wherethepresentQueen"sfamilygoverns,isunderthesamewretchedstateofarbitrarypower,andthepeopleinslavishvassalage。

ThereneverwasatimewhenitbecametheEnglishtowatchcontinentalintriguesmorecircumspectlythanatthepresentmoment,andtodistinguishthepoliticsoftheElectoratefromthepoliticsoftheNation。TheRevolutionofFrancehasentirelychangedthegroundwithrespecttoEnglandandFrance,asnations;buttheGermandespots,withPrussiaattheirhead,arecombiningagainstliberty;andthefondnessofMr。Pittforoffice,andtheinterestwhichallhisfamilyconnectionshaveobtained,donotgivesufficientsecurityagainstthisintrigue。

Aseverythingwhichpassesintheworldbecomesmatterforhistory,Iwillnowquitthissubject,andtakeaconcisereviewofthestateofpartiesandpoliticsinEngland,asMr。BurkehasdoneinFrance。

Whetherthepresentreigncommencedwithcontempt,IleavetoMr。Burke:

certain,however,itis,thatithadstronglythatappearance。TheanimosityoftheEnglishnation,itisverywellremembered,ranhigh;and,hadthetrueprinciplesofLibertybeenaswellunderstoodthenastheynowpromisetobe,itisprobabletheNationwouldnothavepatientlysubmittedtosomuch。GeorgetheFirstandSecondweresensibleofarivalintheremainsoftheStuarts;andastheycouldnotbutconsiderthemselvesasstandingontheirgoodbehaviour,theyhadprudencetokeeptheirGermanprinciplesofgovernmenttothemselves;butastheStuartfamilyworeaway,theprudencebecamelessnecessary。

Thecontestbetweenrights,andwhatwerecalledprerogatives,continuedtoheatthenationtillsometimeaftertheconclusionoftheAmericanWar,whenallatonceitfellacalm—Execrationexchangeditselfforapplause,andCourtpopularitysprunguplikeamushroominanight。

Toaccountforthissuddentransition,itispropertoobservethattherearetwodistinctspeciesofpopularity;theoneexcitedbymerit,andtheotherbyresentment。AstheNationhadformeditselfintotwoparties,andeachwasextollingthemeritsofitsparliamentarychampionsforandagainstprerogative,nothingcouldoperatetogiveamoregeneralshockthananimmediatecoalitionofthechampionsthemselves。Thepartisansofeachbeingthussuddenlyleftinthelurch,andmutuallyheatedwithdisgustatthemeasure,feltnootherreliefthanunitinginacommonexecrationagainstboth。Ahigherstimulusorresentmentbeingthusexcitedthanwhatthecontestonprerogativesoccasioned,thenationquittedallformerobjectsofrightsandwrongs,andsoughtonlythatofgratification。TheindignationattheCoalitionsoeffectuallysupersededtheindignationagainsttheCourtastoextinguishit;andwithoutanychangeofprinciplesonthepartoftheCourt,thesamepeoplewhohadreprobateditsdespotismunitedwithittorevengethemselvesontheCoalitionParliament。Thecasewasnot,whichtheylikedbest,butwhichtheyhatedmost;andtheleasthatedpassedforlove。ThedissolutionoftheCoalitionParliament,asitaffordedthemeansofgratifyingtheresentmentoftheNation,couldnotfailtobepopular;andfromhencearosethepopularityoftheCourt。

TransitionsofthiskindexhibitaNationunderthegovernmentoftemper,insteadofafixedandsteadyprinciple;andhavingoncecommitteditself,howeverrashly,itfeelsitselfurgedalongtojustifybycontinuanceitsfirstproceeding。Measureswhichatothertimesitwouldcensureitnowapproves,andactspersuasionuponitselftosuffocateitsjudgment。

OnthereturnofanewParliament,thenewMinister,Mr。Pitt,foundhimselfinasecuremajority;andtheNationgavehimcredit,notoutofregardtohimself,butbecauseithadresolvedtodoitoutofresentmenttoanother。HeintroducedhimselftopublicnoticebyaproposedReformofParliament,whichinitsoperationwouldhaveamountedtoapublicjustificationofcorruption。TheNationwastobeattheexpenseofbuyinguptherottenboroughs,whereasitoughttopunishthepersonswhodealinthetraffic。

PassingoverthetwobubblesoftheDutchbusinessandthemilliona—yeartosinkthenationaldebt,thematterwhichmostpresentsitself,istheaffairoftheRegency。Never,inthecourseofmyobservation,wasdelusionmoresuccessfullyacted,noranationmorecompletelydeceived。But,tomakethisappear,itwillbenecessarytogooverthecircumstances。

Mr。FoxhadstatedintheHouseofCommons,thatthePrinceofWales,asheirinsuccession,hadarightinhimselftoassumetheGovernment。

ThiswasopposedbyMr。Pitt;and,sofarastheoppositionwasconfinedtothedoctrine,itwasjust。ButtheprincipleswhichMr。Pittmaintainedonthecontrarysidewereasbad,orworseintheirextent,thanthoseofMr。Fox;becausetheywenttoestablishanaristocracyoverthenation,andoverthesmallrepresentationithasintheHouseofCommons。

WhethertheEnglishformofGovernmentbegoodorbad,isnotinthiscasethequestion;but,takingitasitstands,withoutregardtoitsmeritsordemerits,Mr。PittwasfartherfromthepointthanMr。Fox。

Itissupposedtoconsistofthreeparts:—whilethereforetheNationisdisposedtocontinuethisform,thepartshaveanationalstanding,independentofeachother,andarenotthecreaturesofeachother。HadMr。FoxpassedthroughParliament,andsaidthatthepersonalludedtoclaimedonthe,groundoftheNation,Mr。PittmustthenhavecontendedwhathecalledtherightoftheParliamentagainsttherightoftheNation。

Bytheappearancewhichthecontestmade,Mr。Foxtookthehereditaryground,andMr。PitttheParliamentaryground;butthefactis,theybothtookhereditaryground,andMr。Pitttooktheworstofthetwo。

WhatiscalledtheParliamentismadeupoftwoHouses,oneofwhichismorehereditary,andmorebeyondthecontroloftheNationthanwhattheCrown（asitiscalled）issupposedtobe。Itisanhereditaryaristocracy,assumingandassertingindefeasible,irrevocablerightsandauthority,whollyindependentoftheNation。Where,then,wasthemeritedpopularityofexaltingthishereditarypoweroveranotherhereditarypowerlessindependentoftheNationthanwhatitselfassumedtobe,andofabsorbingtherightsoftheNationintoaHouseoverwhichithasneitherelectionnorcontrol？

ThegeneralimpulseoftheNationwasright;butitactedwithoutreflection。

ItapprovedtheoppositionmadetotherightsetupbyMr。Fox,withoutperceivingthatMr。PittwassupportinganotherindefeasiblerightmoreremotefromtheNation,inoppositiontoit。

WithrespecttotheHouseofCommons,itiselectedbutbyasmallpartoftheNation;butweretheelectionasuniversalastaxation,whichitoughttobe,itwouldstillbeonlytheorganoftheNation,andcannotpossessinherentrights。—WhentheNationalAssemblyofFranceresolvesamatter,theresolveismadeinrightoftheNation;butMr。Pitt,onallnationalquestions,sofarastheyrefertotheHouseofCommons,absorbstherightsoftheNationintotheorgan,andmakestheorganintoaNation,andtheNationitselfintoacypher。

Inafewwords,thequestionontheRegencywasaquestionofamilliona—year,whichisappropriatedtotheexecutivedepartment:andMr。Pittcouldnotpossesshimselfofanymanagementofthissum,withoutsettingupthesupremacyofParliament;andwhenthiswasaccomplished,itwasindifferentwhoshouldbeRegent,ashemustbeRegentathisowncost。

Amongthecuriositieswhichthiscontentiousdebateafforded,wasthatofmakingtheGreatSealintoaKing,theaffixingofwhichtoanactwastoberoyalauthority。If,therefore,RoyalAuthorityisaGreatSeal,itconsequentlyisinitselfnothing;andagoodConstitutionwouldbeofinfinitelymorevaluetotheNationthanwhatthethreeNominalPowers,astheynowstand,areworth。

ThecontinualuseofthewordConstitutionintheEnglishParliamentshowsthereisnone;andthatthewholeismerelyaformofgovernmentwithoutaConstitution,andconstitutingitselfwithwhatpowersitpleases。

IftherewereaConstitution,itcertainlycouldbereferredto;andthedebateonanyconstitutionalpointwouldterminatebyproducingtheConstitution。

OnemembersaysthisisConstitution,andanothersaysthatisConstitution—

To—dayitisonething;andto—morrowsomethingelse—whilethemaintainingofthedebateprovesthereisnone。ConstitutionisnowthecantwordofParliament,tuningitselftotheearoftheNation。FormerlyitwastheuniversalsupremacyofParliament—theomnipotenceofParliament:ButsincetheprogressofLibertyinFrance,thosephraseshaveadespoticharshnessintheirnote;andtheEnglishParliamenthavecatchedthefashionfromtheNationalAssembly,butwithoutthesubstance,ofspeakingofConstitution。

AsthepresentgenerationofthepeopleinEnglanddidnotmaketheGovernment,theyarenotaccountableforanyofitsdefects;but,thatsoonerorlater,itmustcomeintotheirhandstoundergoaconstitutionalreformation,isascertainasthatthesamethinghashappenedinFrance。

IfFrance,witharevenueofnearlytwenty—fourmillionssterling,withanextentofrichandfertilecountryabovefourtimeslargerthanEngland,withapopulationoftwenty—fourmillionsofinhabitantstosupporttaxation,withupwardsofninetymillionssterlingofgoldandsilvercirculatinginthenation,andwithadebtlessthanthepresentdebtofEngland—stillfounditnecessary,fromwhatevercause,tocometoasettlementofitsaffairs,itsolvestheproblemoffundingforbothcountries。

ItisoutofthequestiontosayhowlongwhatiscalledtheEnglishconstitutionhaslasted,andtoarguefromthencehowlongitistolast;

thequestionis,howlongcanthefundingsystemlast？Itisathingbutofmoderninvention,andhasnotyetcontinuedbeyondthelifeofaman;

yetinthatshortspaceithassofaraccumulated,that,togetherwiththecurrentexpenses,itrequiresanamountoftaxesatleastequaltothewholelandedrentalofthenationinacrestodefraytheannualexpenditure。

Thatagovernmentcouldnothavealwaysgoneonbythesamesystemwhichhasbeenfollowedforthelastseventyyears,mustbeevidenttoeveryman;andforthesamereasonitcannotalwaysgoon。

Thefundingsystemisnotmoney;neitherisit,properlyspeaking,credit。

It,ineffect,createsuponpaperthesumwhichitappearstoborrow,andlaysonataxtokeeptheimaginarycapitalalivebythepaymentofinterestandsendstheannuitytomarket,tobesoldforpaperalreadyincirculation。

Ifanycreditisgiven,itistothedispositionofthepeopletopaythetax,andnottothegovernment,whichlaysiton。Whenthisdispositionexpires,whatissupposedtobethecreditofGovernmentexpireswithit。

TheinstanceofFranceundertheformerGovernmentshowsthatitisimpossibletocompelthepaymentoftaxesbyforce,whenawholenationisdeterminedtotakeitsstanduponthatground。

Mr。Burke,inhisreviewofthefinancesofFrance,statesthequantityofgoldandsilverinFrance,atabouteighty—eightmillionssterling。

Indoingthis,hehas,Ipresume,dividedbythedifferenceofexchange,insteadofthestandardoftwenty—fourlivrestoapoundsterling;forM。Neckar"sstatement,fromwhichMr。Burke"sistaken,istwothousandtwohundredmillionsoflivres,whichisupwardsofninety—onemillionsandahalfsterling。

M。NeckarinFrance,andMr。GeorgeChalmersattheOfficeofTradeandPlantationinEngland,ofwhichLordHawkesburyispresident,publishednearlyaboutthesametime（1786）anaccountofthequantityofmoneyineachnation,fromthereturnsoftheMintofeachnation。Mr。Chalmers,fromthereturnsoftheEnglishMintattheTowerofLondon,statesthequantityofmoneyinEngland,includingScotlandandIreland,tobetwentymillionssterling。*[12]

M。Neckar*[13]saysthattheamountofmoneyinFrance,recoinedfromtheoldcoinwhichwascalledin,wastwothousandfivehundredmillionsoflivres（upwardsofonehundredandfourmillionssterling）;and,afterdeductingforwaste,andwhatmaybeintheWestIndiesandotherpossiblecircumstances,statesthecirculationquantityathometobeninety—onemillionsandahalfsterling;but,takingitasMr。Burkehasputit,itissixty—eightmillionsmorethanthenationalquantityinEngland。

ThatthequantityofmoneyinFrancecannotbeunderthissum,mayatoncebeseenfromthestateoftheFrenchRevenue,withoutreferringtotherecordsoftheFrenchMintforproofs。TherevenueofFrance,priortotheRevolution,wasnearlytwenty—fourmillionssterling;andaspaperhadthennoexistenceinFrancethewholerevenuewascollectedupongoldandsilver;anditwouldhavebeenimpossibletohavecollectedsuchaquantityofrevenueuponalessnationalquantitythanM。Neckarhasstated。

BeforetheestablishmentofpaperinEngland,therevenuewasaboutafourthpartofthenationalamountofgoldandsilver,asmaybeknownbyreferringtotherevenuepriortoKingWilliam,andthequantityofmoneystatedtobeinthenationatthattime,whichwasnearlyasmuchasitisnow。

Itcanbeofnorealservicetoanation,toimposeuponitself,ortopermititselftobeimposedupon;buttheprejudicesofsome,andtheimpositionofothers,havealwaysrepresentedFranceasanationpossessingbutlittlemoney—whereasthequantityisnotonlymorethanfourtimeswhatthequantityisinEngland,butisconsiderablygreateronaproportionofnumbers。ToaccountforthisdeficiencyonthepartofEngland,somereferenceshouldbehadtotheEnglishsystemoffunding。Itoperatestomultiplypaper,andtosubstituteitintheroomofmoney,invariousshapes;

andthemorepaperismultiplied,themoreopportunitiesareofferedtoexportthespecie;anditadmitsofapossibility（byextendingittosmallnotes）ofincreasingpapertillthereisnomoneyleft。

IknowthisisnotapleasantsubjecttoEnglishreaders;butthemattersIamgoingtomention,aresoimportantinthemselves,astorequiretheattentionofmeninterestedinmoneytransactionsofapublicnature。ThereisacircumstancestatedbyM。Neckar,inhistreatiseontheadministrationofthefinances,whichhasneverbeenattendedtoinEngland,butwhichformstheonlybasiswhereontoestimatethequantityofmoney（goldandsilver）whichoughttobeineverynationinEurope,topreservearelativeproportionwithothernations。

LisbonandCadizarethetwoportsintowhich（money）goldandsilverfromSouthAmericaareimported,andwhichafterwardsdivideandspreadthemselvesoverEuropebymeansofcommerce,andincreasethequantityofmoneyinallpartsofEurope。If,therefore,theamountoftheannualimportationintoEuropecanbeknown,andtherelativeproportionoftheforeigncommerceoftheseveralnationsbywhichitcanbedistributedcanbeascertained,theygivearulesufficientlytrue,toascertainthequantityofmoneywhichoughttobefoundinanynation,atanygiventime。

M。NeckarshowsfromtheregistersofLisbonandCadiz,thattheimportationofgoldandsilverintoEurope,isfivemillionssterlingannually。Hehasnottakenitonasingleyear,butonanaverageoffifteensucceedingyears,from1763to1777,bothinclusive;inwhichtime,theamountwasonethousandeighthundredmillionlivres,whichisseventy—fivemillionssterling。*[14]

FromthecommencementoftheHanoversuccessionin1714tothetimeMr。Chalmerspublished,isseventy—twoyears;andthequantityimportedintoEurope,inthattime,wouldbethreehundredandsixtymillionssterling。

IftheforeigncommerceofGreatBritainbestatedatasixthpartofwhatthewholeforeigncommerceofEuropeamountsto（whichisprobablyaninferiorestimationtowhatthegentlemenattheExchangewouldallow）

theproportionwhichBritainshoulddrawbycommerceofthissum,tokeepherselfonaproportionwiththerestofEurope,wouldbealsoasixthpartwhichissixtymillionssterling;andifthesameallowanceforwasteandaccidentbemadeforEnglandwhichM。NeckarmakesforFrance,thequantityremainingafterthesedeductionswouldbefifty—twomillions;

andthissumoughttohavebeeninthenation（atthetimeMr。Chalmerspublished）,inadditiontothesumwhichwasinthenationatthecommencementoftheHanoversuccession,andtohavemadeinthewholeatleastsixty—sixmillionssterling;insteadofwhichtherewerebuttwentymillions,whichisforty—sixmillionsbelowitsproportionatequantity。

AsthequantityofgoldandsilverimportedintoLisbonandCadizismoreexactlyascertainedthanthatofanycommodityimportedintoEngland,andasthequantityofmoneycoinedattheTowerofLondonisstillmorepositivelyknown,theleadingfactsdonotadmitofcontroversy。Either,therefore,thecommerceofEnglandisunproductiveofprofit,orthegoldandsilverwhichitbringsinleakcontinuallyawaybyunseenmeansattheaveragerateofaboutthree—quartersofamillionayear,which,inthecourseofseventy—twoyears,accountsforthedeficiency;anditsabsenceissuppliedbypaper。*[15]

TheRevolutionofFranceisattendedwithmanynovelcircumstances,notonlyinthepoliticalsphere,butinthecircleofmoneytransactions。

Amongothers,itshowsthatagovernmentmaybeinastateofinsolvencyandanationrich。SofarasthefactisconfinedtothelateGovernmentofFrance,itwasinsolvent;becausethenationwouldnolongersupportitsextravagance,andthereforeitcouldnolongersupportitself—butwithrespecttothenationallthemeansexisted。Agovernmentmaybesaidtobeinsolventeverytimeitappliestothenationtodischargeitsarrears。

TheinsolvencyofthelateGovernmentofFranceandthepresentofEnglanddifferedinnootherrespectthanasthedispositionsofthepeoplediffer。

ThepeopleofFrancerefusedtheiraidtotheoldGovernment;andthepeopleofEnglandsubmittotaxationwithoutinquiry。WhatiscalledtheCrowninEnglandhasbeeninsolventseveraltimes;thelastofwhich,publiclyknown,wasinMay,1777,whenitappliedtothenationtodischargeupwardsofL600,000privatedebts,whichotherwiseitcouldnotpay。

ItwastheerrorofMr。Pitt,Mr。Burke,andallthosewhowereunacquaintedwiththeaffairsofFrancetoconfoundtheFrenchnationwiththeFrenchGovernment。TheFrenchnation,ineffect,endeavouredtorenderthelateGovernmentinsolventforthepurposeoftakinggovernmentintoitsownhands:anditreserveditsmeansforthesupportofthenewGovernment。

InacountryofsuchvastextentandpopulationasFrancethenaturalmeanscannotbewanting,andthepoliticalmeansappeartheinstantthenationisdisposedtopermitthem。WhenMr。Burke,inaspeechlastwinterintheBritishParliament,"casthiseyesoverthemapofEurope,andsawachasmthatoncewasFrance,"hetalkedlikeadreamerofdreams。ThesamenaturalFranceexistedasbefore,andallthenaturalmeansexistedwithit。Theonlychasmwasthattheextinctionofdespotismhadleft,andwhichwastobefilledupwiththeConstitutionmoreformidableinresourcesthanthepowerwhichhadexpired。

AlthoughtheFrenchNationrenderedthelateGovernmentinsolvent,itdidnotpermittheinsolvencytoacttowardsthecreditors;andthecreditors,consideringtheNationastherealpay—master,andtheGovernmentonlyastheagent,restedthemselvesonthenation,inpreferencetotheGovernment。

ThisappearsgreatlytodisturbMr。Burke,astheprecedentisfataltothepolicybywhichgovernmentshavesupposedthemselvessecure。Theyhavecontracteddebts,withaviewofattachingwhatiscalledthemoniedinterestofaNationtotheirsupport;buttheexampleinFranceshowsthatthepermanentsecurityofthecreditorisintheNation,andnotintheGovernment;

andthatinallpossiblerevolutionsthatmayhappeninGovernments,themeansarealwayswiththeNation,andtheNationalwaysinexistence。Mr。

BurkearguesthatthecreditorsoughttohaveabidedthefateoftheGovernmentwhichtheytrusted;buttheNationalAssemblyconsideredthemasthecreditorsoftheNation,andnotoftheGovernment—ofthemaster,andnotofthesteward。

Notwithstandingthelategovernmentcouldnotdischargethecurrentexpenses,thepresentgovernmenthaspaidoffagreatpartofthecapital。

Thishasbeenaccomplishedbytwomeans;theonebylesseningtheexpensesofgovernment,andtheotherbythesaleofthemonasticandecclesiasticallandedestates。Thedevoteesandpenitentdebauchees,extortionersandmisersofformerdays,toensurethemselvesabetterworldthanthattheywereabouttoleave,hadbequeathedimmensepropertyintrusttothepriesthoodforpioususes;andthepriesthoodkeptitforthemselves。TheNationalAssemblyhasorderedittobesoldforthegoodofthewholenation,andthepriesthoodtobedecentlyprovidedfor。