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。