HJ 
 
 2GI7 
 
 UC-NRLF 
 
 ^B 27T M7D 
 

AN EXAMINATION 
 
 OF 
 
 SOME PREVAILING OPINIONS, 
 
 AS TO THE PRESSDRE OP 
 
 TAXATION 
 
 IN THIS, AND OTHER COUNTRIES. 
 
 BY 
 
 GEORGE WARDE NORMAN, ESQ. 
 
 n 
 
 SECOND EDITION. 
 
 ^1 — , -k t i'"» — T — ; ' — 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 T. & W. BOONE, 29, NEW BOND STREET. 
 1850. 
 
*:a% 
 
 
 SXCHANQII 
 
 • • .•- • • • • at 
 
 
r 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 STATEMENT OF QUESTIONS TO BE DISCUSSED. 
 
 There are, perhaps, no opinions more firmly 
 adopted by the vast majority of the British people 
 than those enunciated in the following proposi- 
 tions : — 
 
 1. That the amount of the public expenditure 
 constitutes the great evil of the Government of this 
 country, and seriously impedes the progress of the 
 general prosperity. 
 
 S. That the public expenditure and consequent 
 taxation of Great Britain is much heavier than that 
 of other large civilized countries. 
 
 3. That the British Government is eminently 
 "prodigal in its expenditure, when this is compared 
 with the results obtained, or with the expenditure 
 of the Governments of other great and civilized 
 countries for similar purposes. 
 
 The doctrine contained in these propositions 
 forms the stock in trade of the popular orator. 
 When insisting on them, he is well aware that he is 
 touching a chord which vibrates in the national 
 heart, and does not even attempt to prove that which 
 nobody thinks of denying. 
 
 A 2 
 
 MS06608 
 
But (t is no^; icerely m that part of the community 
 where democratic sympathies most abound that 
 the doctrine prevails. If we go to a meeting of 
 agriculturists we shall find it held with an equally 
 undonbting faith. We are there told by every 
 speaker, that British farmers or landowners can 
 never successfully contend against foreign compe- 
 tition, on account of the heavy public burdens to 
 which they are subjected ; while we are also 
 informed that the foreign corn or cattle producer is 
 in the enviable condition of enjoying the blessings of 
 government almost without having to pay for them. 
 Again, the shipowners declared that the mainte- 
 nance of the navigation laws was necessary for 
 them, on account of the comparative freedom from 
 taxation enjoyed by their foreign rivals. 
 
 In short, complaints against our fiscal burdens 
 are all but universal : differing, as they do, upon 
 almost all other points, upon this Churchman and 
 Dissenter, Whig, Tory, and Radical, agriculturist 
 and shipowner, find that they can cordially agree. 
 
 So undoubting and inveterate, and all but uni- 
 versal is the national feeling upon this matter, that 
 even Ministers, and other organs of the Govern- 
 ment, whose tendencies seem to lie in an opposite 
 direction, appear in some degree to participate in 
 it. They may now and then point to the enormous 
 amount of taxes abolished since the Peace as a 
 reason for suspecting that the remaining burdens 
 cannot be quite so severe as is commonly imagined ; 
 
and their expressions, however cautious and well 
 guarded, may lead to the suspicion that their secret 
 opinions are not quite in unison with the orthodox 
 faith ; but we seldom find them questioning the 
 truth of the popular notion in its essentials. 
 
 The opinion of other nations upon these matters 
 quite agrees with our own. Foreigners universally 
 imagine that the fiscal burdens of the British people 
 are of unparalleled magnitude, and that in this 
 respect our freedom is dearly purchased and paid 
 for. 
 
 The object of the following pages is to bring 
 the question to the test of a candid and truthful 
 examination, the result of which will shew to 
 what, if any extent, the common notion as to 
 the financial condition of Great Britain is well 
 founded. 
 
 Some observations as to the inferences which 
 ought to be drawn from the actual condition of 
 things, as it shall be shewn to exist in this respect, 
 will form an appropriate termination to our labours. 
 
 It may here be remarked, that although the 
 matters in question have never been brought dis- 
 tinctly under discussion by any writer of authority, 
 yet, that when incidentally alluded to, the opinions 
 put forth by some of our most distinguished writers 
 and statesmen, imply a difference of view from that 
 entertained by the public at large. The Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer, in a speech delivered during the 
 last Session, expressed a feeling opposed to that 
 
6 
 
 generally prevalent. A writer in a recent number 
 of the " Edinburgh Review" has gone still farther 
 in the same direction, and the present author may 
 successfully defend himself against the charge of 
 seeking to maintain a senseless paradox, by the 
 following citations from two writers, whom the 
 public voice places at the head of the political 
 economists of our age and country. 
 
 Mr. J. S. Mill, in his recent work, vol. ii. page 
 366, says : — *' A country which, like England, 
 " accumulates capital, not only for itself, but for 
 " half the world, may be said to defray the whole 
 ** of its public expences from its overflowings ; and 
 ' its wealth is probably as great as if it had no 
 " taxes at all." He adds, however : " What its 
 *' taxes really do is to subtract from its means, not 
 '* of production, but of enjoyment ; since whatever 
 *' any one spends in taxes, he could, if it were not 
 '• taken for that purpose, employ in indulging his 
 " ease, or in gratifying some want or taste which at 
 " present remains unsatisfied." 
 
 Mr. Mill's last remark may be followed out by 
 observing, that the means possessed by a nation 
 of spending upon objects of immediate enjoyment 
 not strictly necessary, are commensurate with its 
 means of saving. The indubitable fact that an 
 enormous accumulation of capital, the result of an 
 excess of income over expenditure is the normal 
 condition of England, affords a decided proof that 
 our enjoyments, so far as they arise from unproduc- 
 
tive consumption, cannot be diminished to any ex- 
 cessive extent by the pressure of existing taxation. 
 
 Mr. J. R. Maculloch in his work on Taxation, page 
 10, informs us, that probabilities "go far to warrant 
 *' the belief that but for the contests in which we 
 '* have been engaged since the Revolution, the 
 *' greater part of the wealth expended in carrying 
 " them on would never have existed." He goes on 
 to explain his views further by insisting on the 
 extent to which industry, invention, enterprize, and 
 economy, were stimulated by the increasing pressure 
 of taxation. 
 
 In other passages, however, Mr. Maculloch seems 
 to consider the taxation of England as being very 
 heavy, and that it occasions a transfer of capital to 
 other countries. He particularly insists upon the 
 decay of Holland as having arisen from its high 
 taxation. 
 
 It is indisputable that Holland is, and long has 
 been heavily taxed, but the fact of her absolute 
 decline may still be doubted. She is probably as rich 
 now, as at any former period, — the apparent decline 
 arises from the comparatively more rapid advance 
 of other countries, possessing more extensive and 
 more fertile territories, and a larger population, 
 which in recent times, under an improved system 
 of government, have availed themselves of their 
 natural superiority. 
 
 It may further be remarked, that taxation 
 apparently very heavy, when compared with the 
 
resources of a country, is quite consistent with a 
 rapid increase of wealth if the fiscal system be 
 moderately just and equal, and the government on 
 the whole good. These facts co-existed in a re- 
 markable degree in the Italian Republics, and pro- 
 bably in the great cities of the Low Countries 
 during the middle ages.* 
 
 On the other hand, the downfall of the Roman 
 Empire, and the ruin brought upon so many fair 
 provinces by the Turkish sway, which are justly 
 attributable in a great degree to fiscal causes, 
 did not arise merely from the pressure of taxation 
 measured by the sums brought into the Treasury, 
 or even from the amount assessed on the tax-payers, 
 but from the inequality and injustice with which 
 the taxes were imposed and collected, which had 
 all the characteristics of legal robbery. There 
 was in fact no security for property, and thus 
 industry and accumulation were stifled in their 
 birth. 
 
 * See the interesting picture of Florence given by Giovanni 
 Villani, in his Cronica.— Book II. c. 94. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 PRESSURE OF TAXATION AT THE CLOSE OF THE 
 WAR, COMPARED WITH THAT WHICH EXISTS AT 
 PRESENT. 
 
 It is proposed to examine the propositions con- 
 tained in the opening paragraph of the last chapter 
 separately, and in the order in which they there 
 stand. The object of the present chapter will 
 be to determine, whether the amount of public 
 expenditure really constitutes the great evil of our 
 Government, and seriously impedes the growth of the 
 public prosperity. 
 
 Now, it must never be forgotten that it is not 
 the absolute, but the relative amount of taxation 
 and expenditure, upon which the answer to the 
 question as to the amount of burden which they 
 impose, must depend. It is obvious that the 
 Englishman, or the Anglo-American, may without 
 inconvenience contribute a pound to the National 
 Exchequer, when a Siamese, or an inhabitant of 
 Madagascar, could not even pay a shilling. In short, 
 the pressure of the burden will depend upon the 
 existing means of sustaining it. It is with nations as 
 
10 
 
 with individuals, one man may only exercise a com- 
 mendable liberality, while spending £10,000. per 
 annum. Another may be very justly chargeable 
 with extravagance whose annual expenses are 
 limited to £100. 
 
 The annual income of a private person constitutes 
 the amount, which he may expend during the year, 
 leaving his principal unaltered. Should he spend 
 less, his wealth is increased to the extent of his 
 saving. Should he spend more, his wealth is 
 diminished in proportion. Now the wealth of a 
 Nation consists of the aggregate wealth of all the 
 individuals who compose it, and the income of a 
 nation is formed by a union of all private incomes. 
 Should the expenditure of the State added to that 
 of individuals exceed the national income, the result 
 must be, that the aggregate capital, that fund which 
 is destined for reproduction, and for the permanent 
 support of the industrious classes of society will be 
 lessened. 
 
 In the case of a single person, it is easy by com- 
 paring his income with his expenditure, to ascertain, 
 if he is growing richer or poorer, and by how much^ 
 and could we ascertain exactly the income and 
 expenditure of the whole community, we could fix 
 with equal certainty, the annual increment or 
 decrement of the national wealth ; but in the latter 
 instance the particulars of the calculation are too 
 numerous, and the data too vague to enable us in 
 this way to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion. 
 
11 
 
 Estimates indeed, some of them probably near the 
 truth, have been made as to various branches of the 
 national wealth or income at particular times, and 
 of some of these, use will be made hereafter, but in 
 arguing the main question, it would be inconvenient, 
 to parade before the reader a vast array of figures, 
 which, after all, could hardly lead to a conclusive 
 result. 
 
 It fortunately happens that it is unnecessary to 
 have recourse to the operose process of calculation 
 thus suggested. A shorter mode of arriving at the 
 truth may be proposed. 
 
 The question for consideration is this, — Does the 
 existing expenditure of the State^ by its excessive 
 amount, seriously impede the progress of the national 
 prosperity, so far as that depends on the increase 
 of national wealth ? The proviso is important, for 
 undoubtedly there exist things far more valuable to 
 a nation than mere material possessions. 
 
 We all know, that the expenditure of the State 
 has been greatly diminished since the Peace. It is 
 equally clear that the wealth of the community has 
 enormously increased within that period. It follows 
 indisputably, that the proportion which the income 
 of the country bears to its expenditure is at the 
 present time much greater than it was at the 
 termination of the war. The burden in fact has 
 been lessened, and if, when the pressure of the 
 burden was greatest, we yet advanced, however 
 slowly, it is clear that our onward progress cannot 
 
12 
 
 now be very seriously impeded, by the diminished 
 weight we are still forced to carry. 
 
 The published financial accounts convey the most 
 accurate information as to the annual expenses 
 of the State for a long series of years, but how 
 are we to arrive at a knowledge of the amount of 
 national wealth at each corresponding period ? The 
 calculations ordinarily produced, as already re- 
 marked, are too vague and uncertain to lead to 
 results quite satisfactory, although they may afford 
 important subsidiary aid. It fortunately happens 
 that we possess exact returns as to the progressive 
 growth of the most important element in the pro- 
 duction of wealth, viz., Labour, — the exercise of the 
 moral and physical powers of man for industrial 
 purposes. Without labour there can be no crea- 
 tion of wealth, and other things being equal, the 
 quantity of wealth produced, will be in proportion 
 to the labour employed. 
 
 It is then a fair and safe assumption that the 
 wealth of a country has increased to an extent 
 corresponding with the increase in the number of 
 labourers — in other words with its population. 
 Unless on the other hand it can be shewn that the 
 ratio of capital to population has been diminishing, 
 or that land, and the other natural agents of pro- 
 duction are yielding a lessened return as compared 
 with the increased amount of industrial enterprize 
 employed upon them. In the case of England, none 
 of these modifying circumstances have occurred to in- 
 
13 
 
 validate the inference. We may therefore fairly con- 
 clude that the wealth of this country has increased to 
 an extent at least corresponding with the increase of 
 her population. The amount of population at each 
 decennial period is known with great exactness. For 
 any year or series of years between each decennial 
 period, it may be readily estimated with sufficient 
 precision. 
 
 It is not meant that an increase of population 
 is necessarily accompanied by a corresponding 
 increase of national wealth. It is possible that 
 an increase of population may co-exist with a 
 deteriorated condition of the people. That the 
 inhabitants of a country may continue to multiply, 
 although their means of subsistence and of obtain- 
 ing comforts may diminish. But this in a period of 
 peace and civilization, is a most unusual occur- 
 rence — all that commonly happens is, that a people 
 do not, owing to the increase in their numbers, reap 
 all the advantage which they would otherwise obtain 
 from the increase of their wealth. The poorer 
 classes in most countries would be better off, were 
 they rather less numerous, than they actually are. 
 
 It must be so obvious to any observant person, 
 that the wealth of this country has increased since 
 the Peace, in a greater ratio than the population ; 
 that upon this point it may suffice to appeal to the 
 observation or recollection of the reader. Few 
 probably will deny that the condition of every 
 class of society has been elevated during the 
 
14 
 
 intervening period ; even that of unskilled labourers 
 cannot be deemed an exception. Though they have 
 not advanced like those above them in the social 
 scale, still it cannot be doubted that their condition 
 is better than it was during the last few years of 
 the war. 
 
 The ratio of increase in the population since the 
 peace may be taken as 28 to 19, but the following 
 facts prove that the national wealth, during that 
 period, has increased in a still greater ratio. 
 
 The declared value of British and Irish produce 
 exported in 1814,* was £45,494,000, or deducting 
 20 per cent for depreciation as will be explained 
 hereafter, about £36,000,000; in 1844 it was 
 £58,480,000; in 1848, a year of diminished trade, 
 owing to the Continental Revolutions, £53,383,000. 
 In 1849 it will probably have reached nearly sixty 
 millions. 
 
 The vessels belonging to the United Kingdom and 
 the Colonies in 1814, were 24,418, with a tonnage 
 of 2,616,000; in 1845, vessels 31,817, tonnage 
 3,714,000. In 1848, 33,672, tonnage 4,052, l60.t 
 Upon this item it must be remarked, that the increase 
 though large would have been far larger, had it not 
 been for the great improvement in Navigation during 
 the last thirty years. Two ships now do the work of 
 three then. It may further be observed, that during 
 the war, a very large number of merchant vessels 
 
 * Porter — Progress of the Nation, pp. 361, 362. 
 t Porter, Table in Appendix. 
 
15 
 
 was constantly employed for State purposes, as 
 transports, while hardly any are now so employed. 
 
 The capital which became subject to Legacy 
 Duty in 1814 was £^7,^90,000, as much of this 
 was funded or other property, to which a deduction 
 for the depreciation of money is not applicable, 
 an allowance of 10 per cent, upon this item will 
 form the basis of a fair comparison. This will 
 leave £^24,569, 100. In 1845, the capital subject 
 to Legacy duty was £45,999,000. 
 
 Mr. Porter estimates the value of personal pro- 
 perty in 1814 at £1,200,000,000, from which a 
 fair deduction for depreciation must be made ; and 
 in 1845 at £2,200,000,000., and he informs us, that 
 the increased rental of real property in England and 
 Wales during the thirty years of peace exceeds forty 
 millions, representing a capital of 1000 millions. 
 The increase in the value of real property in Scot- 
 land has probably been in a larger ratio, and up to 
 the breaking out of the potato disease, Ireland was 
 rapidly advancing in this respect. 
 
 The value of the property insured against fire 
 was, in 1811, £366,000^000, and in 18*21, 
 £408,000,000. We may assume a medium between 
 these sums for 1815, viz. £387,000,000. In 1845, 
 it was £722,000,000. 
 
 The various taxes reduced and abolished since 
 the Peace, and up to the end of 1845, yielded to the 
 Revenue, no less a sum than £50,182,000. In that 
 interval taxes to the amount of £13,254,000. had 
 
16 
 
 been imposed.* The balance in favour of reduction 
 was thus about 37 millions. It may here be re- 
 marked, that the sum collected in the last years 
 of the war from actual taxation was about 70 
 millions, and that consequently an enormous pro- 
 portion of the taxes then existing must since have 
 been removed. On the other hand it is obvious, 
 that the wealth of the country must have vastly 
 increased, in order to account for the collection of 
 52 millions now forming our revenue, from the old 
 imposts still existing, with the additions made to 
 them in later times. 
 
 After examining the above figures, it will be 
 impossible for the most desponding not to come to 
 the conclusion that the national wealth has increased 
 far more rapidly than the population, and that in 
 assuming only an equal progression we are much 
 within the truth. 
 
 Some persons may be inclined to allow that the 
 amount of wealth in the country, measured by the 
 mass of commodities which compose it, has in- 
 creased faster than the population, who would 
 at the same time doubt, if the money value of these 
 commodities, which we must mainly look to when 
 discussing the question of the absolute or com- 
 parative pressure of money taxation, had increased 
 in that proportion. 
 
 It must be at once conceded that prices have fallen 
 considerably since the Peace. That the increase in 
 
 * See Porter, p. 493. 
 
^7 
 
 the value of commodities, &c, produced or possessed 
 by the community is far less than the increase in 
 the number of those commodities. This remark is 
 made in anticipation of objections ; and the reader's 
 attention is therefore called to the fact that the 
 figures just produced point not merely to an 
 increase in the amount of commodities, but to an 
 increase in their money value greater than the 
 proportionate increase in the population. 
 
 Mr. Porter gives us a table at page 507, which 
 exhibits the progress of the chief branches of the 
 revenue in each year of the century, taking into 
 account the taxes imposed or repealed, and which 
 shews also at each successive period, what the taxes 
 ought to have produced, supposing their produce to 
 have increased in the same ratio with the numbers 
 of the people. 
 
 It appears from this table that the increase in 
 the produce of the taxes did not keep pace with the 
 increase in the population up to 1828. In that year 
 there was an excess of about £1,000,000. The fol- 
 lowing three years again exhibited a deficiency, 
 but in 1832 the tide turned. In every succeeding 
 year a surplus has been exhibited : by 1845 this 
 surplus nearly reached the large sum of £7,000,000. 
 
 There is one assumption which it will be con- 
 venient to make, although it is not necessary to the 
 validity of the argument. It is this : that during 
 the most expensive period of the war we did npt 
 
 B 
 
18 
 
 spend more than our income, — that we never 
 trenched upon our capital. 
 
 Those who recollect the remarkable years 
 which preceded the General Peace, will not fail 
 to remember that they exhibited no symptoms 
 of decline so far as respected the national wealth. 
 In spite of the enormous public burthens, the 
 savings of individuals still enabled them to build 
 houses, factories, and ships, and to convert a large 
 amount of circulating into fixed capital. In short, 
 this assumption would be considered by many an 
 indubitable fact. 
 
 At page 477 of Mr. Porter's interesting and 
 instructive work will be found a passage in which 
 he expresses an opinion, that during the period 
 which immediately preceded the Peace of Amiens, 
 the public expenditure pressed so severely on the 
 resources of the country, that on the whole, the 
 national wealth was diminished, and that the suf- 
 ferings of the mass of the people, which then 
 existed, were referable, in part, to the want of the 
 capital requisite for their employment at fair 
 wages ; and it appears, in page 514-, that Mr. 
 Porter's opinion as to the economical condition 
 of the country during the latter period of the war, 
 resembles that which he entertains as to its con- 
 dition immediately preceding the Peace of Amiens, 
 he consequently so far differs from me. 
 
 After giving this matter the best consideration in 
 
19 
 
 my power, I am compelled still to believe that the 
 Government expenditure, vast and reckless as it 
 was, in both those periods, did not really exceed 
 the national income. The sufferings of the working 
 classes, to which Mr. Porter refers in support of 
 his opinion as to the first period referred to, may 
 be fully explained by the successive bad harvests, 
 and the high prices of food and necessaries which 
 occurred indeed during both periods. A vast un- 
 productive expenditure on the part of individuals, 
 and an enormous augmentation in the number of 
 ships, buildings of all kinds, machinery, &c.— in 
 short, a rapid conversion of circulating into fixed 
 capital, could hardly have co-existed with a diminu- 
 tion in the amount of capital. 
 
 It is a well-known fact, that money wages never 
 rise or fall as fast as the price of the articles on 
 which they are expended. While a depreciation 
 of the bank note was going on, the labourer pro- 
 bably suffered from being paid in a currency of 
 diminished value, in addition to what he lost from 
 the really enhanced price of the necessaries of life. 
 
 The apparent paralysis which affected the 
 country at the final close of the war, appears to 
 have arisen from the general dislocation of in- 
 dustry, and the very deficient harvest of 181(), aided, 
 of course, by the immense expenditure of the 
 Government, which must have diminished accumu- 
 lation, even if it did not altogether prevent it. 
 The general suffering would doubtless have been 
 
 B 2 
 
20 
 
 less serious had a smaller public expenditure 
 during the preceding years allowed capital to 
 accumulate to a greater extent. The country was 
 not positively poorer, but it was less rich than it 
 might have been. 
 
 A passage may be cited from Mr. Ricardo's 
 great work on the Principles of Political Economy 
 and Taxation, 3rd edition, p. 164<, which evinces 
 a general accordance between his views and 
 those here' propounded. He says, **Notwith- 
 " standing the immense expenditure of the Eng- 
 ** lish Government during the last twenty years, 
 " there can be little doubt but that the increased 
 " production on the part of the people has more 
 " than compensated for it. The national capital 
 " has not merely been unimpaired, it has greatly 
 " increased, and the annual revenue of the people, 
 " even after the payment of their taxes, is probably 
 *' greater at the present time than at any former 
 ** period of their history. 
 
 " For the proof of this we might refer to the 
 " increase of population — to the extension of agri- 
 " culture — to the increase of shipping and manu- 
 " factures — to the building of docks — to the opening 
 *' of numerous canals, as well as to many other 
 " expensive undertakings, all denoting an increase 
 " both of capital and of annual production." 
 
 But whether the opinion of Mr. Porter, or my 
 own, upon this point be the more correct, the 
 general validity of the argument is not affected. 
 
21 
 
 It is sufficient for my purpose that on the whole, 
 the wealth of the country had enormously increased 
 during the war, in spite of the vast financial 
 burdens imposed upon it. My reasoning, stated 
 shortly, is this : England, during the last few years 
 of the war, was exposed to an amount of expenditure 
 far heavier in proportion to her wealth than at 
 present, without manifest impoverishment She 
 cannot then suffer any overwhelming injury, from 
 the greatly diminished expenditure which she is now 
 called upon to defray from her vastly augmented 
 wealth. 
 
 After these explanations, the reader's attention 
 is called to the several steps of the proposed argu- 
 ment, in order that he may the more easily perceive 
 all the bearings of what is to follow. 
 
 The expenditure of the last years of the war 
 will be compared with that of the present time, so 
 as to shew the actual diminution. 
 
 The population for the two periods, will then be 
 exhibited. 
 
 Finally, the per centage of diminution in the ex- 
 penditure will be pointed out, upon the supposition 
 that the national wealth has increased in proportion 
 to the increase in population. 
 
 It may be advisable to remark here, in order to 
 avoid cavil, that expenditure is compared with 
 expenditure, and not taxation with taxation, be- 
 cause the latter alone would give an unfair result. 
 At present, on an average of years, the amount of 
 
22 
 
 taxation exceeds the expense of government, and 
 has served to diminish the debt, while during the 
 war, immense sums were annually borrowed. But 
 loans, unless when supplied by foreigners, are as 
 much a portion of the national income or capital, 
 as the sums raised by the Property or any other tax. 
 The only advantage which they possess over the 
 latter in this respect is, that they do not immedi- 
 ately swell the expenses of collection, and that they 
 do not, like interferent duties on commodities, take 
 from the public at large more than they yield to the 
 Exchequer. These advantages are more than 
 counterbalanced by special disadvantages in the 
 system of loans, which it is not my present purpose 
 to dwell upon. 
 
 The assumption that money raised by loans, and 
 money raised by taxes, are, for the purposes of the 
 present argument, the same thing, will doubtless ap- 
 pear strange to many persons. Such persons should 
 recollect that the evil consists in the dissipation and 
 destruction of a certain amount of the wealth pre- 
 viously belonging to the community, and that the 
 simple fact of its destruction is in no way altered by 
 the mode in which the aggregate of commodities 
 and services forming the wealth in question, has 
 been transferred from the people to the Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 But the question may here be asked, to what 
 extent is the proposition true, which asserts that 
 a loan relieves the existing generation at the ex- 
 pence of posterity ? 
 
23 
 
 In order to enable us to give a satisfactory answer 
 to this question, a little explanation is required. 
 The whole produce of a loan, like that of a tax, is 
 usually dissipated and lost. But those who furnish 
 it, do so willingly ; they consider the annuity pro- 
 mised them a sufficient equivalent. On the other 
 hand, the feeling of sacrifice on the part of the 
 tax-payers commence with, and is limited by the 
 amount of their annuity. Their means of economy, 
 or of immediate enjoyment, are lessened only to 
 this extent. But then the obligation to pay the 
 annuity is not confined to those who are called 
 upon to pay it in the first instance, but continues 
 during successive generations, until the loan is 
 discharged. Thus explained, the remark, that a loan 
 relieves the present generation at the expense of 
 posterity, is correct, but not in the sense of its 
 diminishing the national wealth to a less extent 
 than a tax of the same amount would do. 
 
 The loan in fact probably lessens the national 
 wealth, even more than a tax, because it is not 
 accompanied with the same inducement to econo- 
 mize its amount, through the means of a lessened 
 expenditure on the part of individuals. ' 
 
 These observations all apply to loans raised at 
 home. A loan raised in foreign countries, as has 
 been before remarked, only diminishes the national 
 wealth, through the means, and to the extent of the 
 annuity paid for it, unless when it is finally dis- 
 charged. 
 
24 
 
 In looking at the expenditure during the last year 
 of the war^ a deduction of ^0 per cent ha« been 
 allowed for depreciation of the paper money. 
 This rate appears to be a fair average, looking 
 simply at the market price of gold. It is probably, 
 however, too great when applied to a comparison 
 of the public expenditure between the years pre- 
 ceding the general peace and the present. The 
 market price of gold, during the existence of the Bank 
 Restriction Act, depended upon the immediate action 
 of the foreign exchanges, which were greatly inter- 
 fered with by the foreign payments of the Govern- 
 ment, and by other accidental and temporary causes. 
 The depreciation was not sufficiently durable and 
 steady to have affected equally the prices of all 
 commodities in the interior, and thus to have les- 
 sened the burthen of taxation and loans, by its full 
 amount. This remark should be borne in mind in 
 considering* what follows. 
 
 The average expenditure of the years 1813-14, 
 and 15, was £101,685,000, or deducting 20 per 
 cent for depreciation, £81,450,000.* 
 
 The averag expenditure for the years 1843-4-5, 
 including above £5,700,000, employed in the 
 redemption of debt, was £5^,^248,000. 
 
 These three years are selected because they are 
 the last, of which the results are given in Mr. Porter's 
 excellent work on the Progress of the Nation, 
 
 * See Table, page 483, from Porter's Progress of the Nation, 
 in Appendix. 
 
25 
 
 which has furnished me with the whole of the 
 statistical facts employed in this chapter, and because 
 the average expenditure which they exhibit is as 
 nearly as can be, the present expenditure which 
 may thus be considered normal. The budgets of 
 the intervening years were swelled, by the conse- 
 quences of the Irish famine, Caffre War, &c. 
 
 We have already seen why it would be unfair 
 to compare actual taxation simply with former 
 taxation, but in Mr. Porter's Work, p. 483, will be 
 found ample information as to the produce of taxes 
 for all the years from 1792 to 1845. 
 
 It follows from what has preceded that the posi- 
 tive reduction of expenditure since the Peace has 
 been about twenty-nine millions on eighty-one mil- 
 lions, or about 36 per cent. 
 
 The medium population of the British islands 
 towards the close of the war, may be taken at about 
 nineteen millions. On an average of the last few 
 years, we will take it at twenty-eight millions, 
 which is probably too low for the present time.* 
 
 Upon the assumption that national wealth has 
 increased equally with the increase of population, 
 the comparative reduction in expenditure has been 
 53 per cent. 
 
 It follows from these figures that the country 
 could now sustain an expenditure of £119,000,000, 
 with no greater pressure than was inflicted by 
 £8 1 ,000,000 at the close of the war. That we could 
 
 * See Note in Appendix. 
 
26 
 
 now bear a system of taxation, looking at taxation 
 simply, which produced £8^,000,000, as we then 
 bore one, which produced at least £56,000,000, and 
 that an expenditure of £52,000,000, at present, 
 presses no more upon our resources than an expendi- 
 ture of £35,000,000 would have done about 1815. 
 
 It may be useful to put this matter in a some- 
 what different shape. At the close of the war we 
 spent about £4. 45. per head for public purposes. 
 At present we spend about £1. 17s. The reduction 
 in comparative expenditure during the intervening 
 period, has amounted to about £2. 6s, per head. 
 
 Financial Reformers are fond of referring to the 
 period just preceding the revolutionary war, as that 
 which almost reached the acme of economy in the 
 disbursements of the State. Now the expenditure 
 of 1792, which, however, included nearly two and 
 a-half millions of debt paid off, was £19,258,000. 
 The population of the British Islands at that period 
 was probably about fourteen millions. The expen- 
 diture per head was consequently less than it now is ; 
 but such has been the subsequent increase in the 
 national income, that it seems clear that the actual 
 pressure of Taxation was greater than at present. 
 
 Now can anv reasonable man look into the state- 
 ments thus presented to him, without feeling the 
 most entire conviction that our existing financial 
 burthens, heavy as they appear to be, when the 
 mere money amount is regarded, press but lightly 
 on the resources of the country ? and that they are 
 
27 
 
 no unreasonable price to pay for the inestimable 
 blessings of good government at home, and for 
 security against attack from nations devoted to 
 military pursuits ? Fifty-two millions sterling is 
 indeed a large sum, but the richest community 
 which ever existed upon earth could afford, if its 
 honour or real interest was at stake, to expend 
 a far larger amount without any enormous suffer- 
 ing on the part of the contributors. That 
 burthen, which we once bore, we could in case of 
 necessity bear again. 
 
 A general negative to the proposition which has 
 taken so firm a hold of the popular mind, viz. 
 " That the amount of the public expenditure con- 
 stitutes the great evil of the government of this 
 country, and seriously impedes the progress of the 
 general prosperity," is sufficiently established by the 
 preceding argument. 
 
 The following remarks tend to shew that the 
 comparative reduction of 53 per cent, which, 
 looking simply to figures, has been the diminution 
 in our expenditure since the peace ; has been far 
 short of the real diminution in the charge upon the 
 national income. 
 
 1 . The deduction of 20 per cent allowed, in order 
 to bring the depreciated paper money, which circu- 
 lated at the end of the war, on a level with the 
 Bank Notes and Sovereigns of the present day, is 
 probably too high. This point has been already 
 adverted to. 
 
28 
 
 Q, Taxation during the last years of general hos- 
 tilities, was far more costly and impolitic than at 
 present. The restrictive system of Finance then 
 flourished in baneful luxuriance. One of its main 
 objects was to protect certain favoured interests, 
 and to interfere with the free and more profitable 
 application of capital and industry, lliere were 
 many imposts most costly to the country which 
 brought but an inconsiderable sum to the Exche- 
 quer, and it may be safely affirmed, that any given 
 sum involved in its collection at that time, a com- 
 paratively far heavier amount of sacrifice than at 
 present. 
 
 It is ohvious, that this observation does not 
 apply to the sums raised by loans, which do not 
 otherwise interfere with industry, than by abstract- 
 ing from the existing mass of capital, a portion 
 of its amount, or by lessening the addition to it, 
 which otherwise results from the excess of income 
 over expenditure. 
 
 3. During the war, a large portion of the whole 
 expenditure was employed in a way which pre- 
 cluded the possibility that any part of it could be 
 economized. Subsidies to foreign powers, ships, 
 powder and shot, and in a somewhat less degree, 
 the pay, food, and clothing of soldiers and sailors, 
 fell under this category. At present above 50 per 
 cent of the budget is handed over to the national 
 creditors, who as a body are eminently economical, 
 perhaps quite as much so, as the tax -payers them- 
 
S9 
 
 selves, and whose savings go to increase the national 
 capital. In this point of view, the taxes which 
 are appropriated for the payment of the dividends 
 cannot be looked upon as more than a transfer of 
 income. As respects those who pay them, indeed, 
 they are just as real a deduction from the means 
 of economy or of immediate enjoyment, as any 
 other public imposts. But to those who receive 
 them, it must be remembered that they are to the 
 same extent an addition to their means of economy, 
 or of immediate enjoyment. 
 
 The unproductive expenditure of the Fund- 
 holders is partly returned to the Exchequer, in the 
 shape of taxes on consumption, and their wealth 
 contributes to the Legacy Duty. 
 
 Another matter may here be brought before the 
 reader's attention, which seems decisively to shew, 
 that our existing taxation cannot seriously affect 
 the public wealth ; and that any possible diminution 
 in the expenditure of Government, is altogether 
 unimportant as regards this point. It is probable, 
 that nearly as large a sum as the whole expenses of 
 the State amount to, is annually wasted by the 
 folly and extravagance of individuals. This process 
 is going on every day, in every corner of the United 
 Kingdom ; and besides, the losses individually 
 small, but vast in the aggregate, which are thus 
 inflicted on the nation, we observe every few years, 
 in what appear to be recurring cycles, a sort 
 of epidemic, which affects large masses of the 
 
30 
 
 community, inducing them to embark in irrational 
 schemes, subsequently productive of enormous loss. 
 Thus during the last thirty years, we have had 
 successively— the South American and other foreign 
 Loans — the absurd projects of 1825 — the Joint 
 Stock Banks — the purchases of United States Stock 
 and Shares —and finally, the Railroad Mania. The 
 sums lost by individuals in these several enter- 
 prises, have been prodigious. In the aggregate, 
 they would make no inconsiderable figure if 
 placed by the side of the sum composing the national 
 debt. 
 
 The very respectable and intelligent body of 
 Merchants and Traders, who have lately induced 
 the Legislature to make important changes in the 
 Laws applicable to Bankruptcy and Insolvency, 
 state their opinion, that the loss annually sustained 
 by the mass of creditors does not fall short of 50 
 millions ; and there is no reason to suppose the 
 statement to be exaggerated. Now, some portion 
 of this vast sum does not probably represent so 
 much capital wasted, for a debt may arise from a 
 wager, or any speculative operation, when all that 
 is lost by A is gained by B,— but the largest por- 
 tion may safely be regarded as so much national 
 wealth dissipated by the misfortunes, the extrava- 
 gance, or the folly of individuals. 
 
 Let us suppose, that one-half of the 50 millions, 
 which is certainly far below the truth, may fall 
 under the latter category. To this, in order to 
 
31 
 
 estimate the entire loss to the country arising from 
 over-expenditure, or abortive speculation, we must 
 add the amount unprofitably invested by individuals 
 not insolvent, and which consequently does not so 
 palpably meet the public eye. It is not unreason- 
 able to estimate this as being equal to the sum 
 squandered by Bankrupts and Insolvents, and on 
 the whole, we may safely conclude, that in esti- 
 mating that 50 millions on an average are fooled 
 way annually in one way or other, we rather fall 
 short of, than exceed the truth. 
 
 Yet, even after the whole community has been 
 supported, the expenditure of the State defrayed, 
 and so immense a sum uselessly dissipated, a large 
 balance still remains representing the annual 
 savings of individuals, which goes to swell the 
 national wealth. How enormous then must be the 
 gross aggregate income of the community. 
 
 The reader will recollect that it has been shewn, 
 supposing the increase of wealth to have kept pace 
 with that of the population, that a diminution of 
 pressure arising from public burdens has taken 
 place since the Peace to the extent of 53 per cent, 
 but on reading the foregoing observations, he will 
 probably be of opinion, that the reduction thus 
 exhibited falls far short of the real truth. By how 
 much short, can only be a matter of conjecture. 
 If we say, that the real reduction has been 67 per 
 cent, or two-thirds, we shall probably still be 
 too low, and taking all things into calculation, it 
 
3€ 
 
 seems probable, that we shall not be far wrong in 
 fixing it at 75 per cent, or three -fourths. In other 
 words, it may be assumed, on highly probable 
 grounds, that an individual with a given fortune or 
 income, who in taxes and loans, paid we will say 
 £100 to the State in 1815, would now only pay in 
 the same way £25. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE PRESSURE OF TAXATION IN ENGLAND, COMPARED 
 WITH THAT IN FRANCE, AND OTHER COUNTRIES. 
 
 Having now disposed of the first of the propo- 
 sitions, which form the subject of our inquiry, viz. 
 ** That the amount of the public expenditure forms 
 " the great evil of the government of this country, 
 ** and most seriously impedes the progress of the 
 ** general prosperity," I proceed to discuss the 
 second, viz. *'That the public expenditure and con- 
 *' sequent taxation of Great Britain is much heavier 
 ** than that of other large civilized countries." 
 
 Now the reader will recollect that in speaking of 
 expenditure and taxation as being heavy or light, 
 we mean comparatively so, — comparatively in the 
 present and last chapters with the national wealth 
 from which they are drawn. In the next chapter, 
 we shall have occasion to speak of them compara- 
 tively with the services rendered to the community, 
 which are their proper result. 
 
 We have already seen that in order to calculate 
 exactly in a given case, the pressure of the financial 
 burdens upon the resources of a State, — we ought 
 to know the aggregate income or wealth of the 
 community, which forms that State. It seems, 
 
 c 
 
34 
 
 however, that exact knowledge upon this point is 
 unattainable, and that even an estimate appearing 
 to approach towards accuracy, would involve us 
 in an overpowering mass of figures, which after all 
 might not lead to a trustworthy result. 
 
 A different process has been adopted in the last 
 chapter. The expenditure of the British Govern- 
 ment at the period when it was highest, has been 
 contrasted with that of a recent period, and of the 
 present time. The population at these different 
 periods has also been exhibited, and on the unde- 
 niable assumption that the public income and 
 wealth has increased in at least an equal ratio with 
 the population, it has been shewn that the per 
 centage of reduction in the public burdens cannot 
 have fallen short of 53 per cent. 
 
 Strong reasons indeed have been adduced o'\ 
 enforce the belief that the real diminution of pres- 
 sure has not fallen short of 67, and that it has 
 perhaps even reached 75 per cent. 
 
 It is now our business to compare the pressure of 
 the public expenditure of Great Britain, with the 
 similar pressure in one or more great civilised coun- 
 tries, and the country which it seems most con- 
 venient to select for the purpose of comparison is 
 France, our nearest neighbour, our best friend in 
 peace, our most formidable foe in war. 
 
 The results of our inquiry will probably be 
 to convince the impartial reader that his pre- 
 conceived opinion ( if, as is not unlikely, it be 
 simply founded on, and conforms to the float- 
 
35 
 
 ing popular impression), is equally erroneous, as 
 that dictum has been shewn to be, which ascribes to 
 our taxation a highly injurious effect on the public 
 prosperity. 
 
 No attempt has been made to furnish an esti- 
 mate of the aggregate wealth and income of the 
 British nation. It would be equally useless to 
 venture on an estimate of the wealth and income of 
 the French people. As respects them, the course 
 will be adopted which seems to have been successful 
 as respects ourselves. Their public expenditure 
 and population, at a distant period, when the former 
 appeared to have reached a maximum, in relation 
 to the resources of the State, will be compared with 
 the population and expenditure of more recent times. 
 
 It will be assumed that in their case, as in ours, 
 the public wealth has increased at least as fast as 
 the population. 
 
 It will be convenient, although not necessary, 
 to suppose that the expenditure of France during 
 the first period referred to in the comparison, bore 
 as heavily on her resources, as did that of England 
 during the years 1813-14 and 1,5. In the latter 
 case, it is certain, or at least highly probable, that 
 the national capital was never trenched upon. 
 That all our burdens were defrayed from income. 
 Those who recollect France during the years im- 
 mediately succeeding the war, will perhaps hardly 
 agree, that her efforts did not at that period trench 
 upon her capital. At any rate, in assuming for 
 
 c 2 
 
33 
 
 France an equality of pressure during the years 
 1815-16 and 17, with that of England during 
 1813-14 and 15, it would appear that an unnecessary 
 concession has been made. 
 
 The aggregate wealth and income of France has 
 doubtless increased still faster than the population 
 during the last thirty years, but the same fact 
 is undeniably true of England; and it would 
 seem, that in assuming for the two countries an 
 equal increase of wealth compared with the res- 
 pective increase of population, more is granted 
 than the real facts demand : the truth probably 
 being:, that the rate of increase in the wealth of 
 Great Britain has been far greater than the simple 
 equality thus claimed for her. If the inhabitants of 
 France, taking one with another, are richer now 
 than they were thirty years ago, the inhabitants of 
 England, taking one with another, are richer in a 
 still higher degree. 
 
 In the year 1815, unless the few months suc- 
 ceeding the truce of Amiens (including as they 
 did the expedition to St. Domingo), and the interval 
 before the return of Napoleon from Elba, can be 
 considered as exceptions, France had been engaged 
 in uninterrupted war for twenty-two years. Her 
 resources had at first been strained to resist the 
 great confederacy of European sovereigns ; then to 
 establish her supremacy in Europe ; and finally, to 
 repel the retaliatory attack of the plundered and 
 insulted nations, who had combined to throw ofiPthe 
 
37 
 
 yoke of the oppressor, and to secure their own 
 independence. The removal of a vast mass of 
 antiquated abuses, one of the immediate conse- 
 quences of the first Revolution, had opened up to 
 her population means of acquiring wealth and of 
 improving their condition, so numerous and im- 
 portant, that France had borne the enormous bur- 
 dens thrown upon her better than could otherwise 
 have been expected, and had made even some 
 advances on the road to prosperity. This observa- 
 tion, however, applies almost exclusively to the 
 rural population. Her foreign commerce had been 
 ruined by the war, and her most useful manufac- 
 tures in general were in a very low and imperfect 
 state. 
 
 Her financial difficulties, how^ever, had not 
 reached their acme at the general Peace. As one 
 of its conditions she had to pay heavy contributions 
 to the Allied Powers, and to maintain on her soil 
 a large foreign army. The result was a great 
 addition to her expenditure, so as to carry it for 
 the years 1815-16-17 to an amount hitherto unpre- 
 cedented. These then are the three years selected 
 as the first object of our comparison. 
 
 It is true that the expenditure of the year 1818 
 was much higher than any of them ; but we should 
 arrive at an erroneous conclusion were we to take 
 that year into the account, as the excess in its expen- 
 diture was wholly defrayed by loans raised in foreign 
 countries, chiefly in England, which did not there- 
 
38 
 
 fore weigh upon the resources of France until sub- 
 sequently, and then only for the interest payable 
 upon them, or for purchases made as a matter of 
 investment by French citizens. 
 
 In reflecting upon what follows, it may occur to 
 some readers, that the general Budget of France 
 includes many things which in England are left 
 to individual enterprise, or are provided for by 
 the funds of corporate bodies, or by local taxation, 
 and that in making a comparison between the 
 expenditure of France and England, an allowance 
 ought to be made for such differences.* The 
 fact is indubitable, and in the next chapter, when 
 we have to examine into the charge of prodi- 
 gality so usually brought against the Government 
 of England, consideration will be given to that 
 view of the subject. At present our business, 
 as already explained, is simply to compare the 
 expenditure of France itself at two distinct 
 periods, and the conclusion to which we may 
 arrive will be fairly drawn, unless it can be 
 shewn that any new principle had been introduced 
 into French finance during the interval between 
 them— that, for instance, expenses heretofore borne 
 by the Municipalities had been transferred to the 
 
 * We may here remark, that during the last few years, many 
 expenses, heretofore defrayed by local taxation in England, have 
 been transferred, perhaps unwisely, in some instances, to the 
 National Exchequer. Police—the prosecution of criminals — 
 schoolmasters in workhouses — medical officers partially, &c. &c. 
 fall under this head. 
 
39 
 
 State, or vice versd. This, however, does not 
 appear to have been the case. 
 
 The financial years which we shall compare with 
 1815-16-17, are the years 1845-6-7. The year 1818 
 is thrown out of the account, because its excess of 
 expenditure was defrayed by foreigners. The year 
 1848 is also rejected, because the financial prodi- 
 gality of the Republic may be regarded as abnormal, 
 and as likely to disappear with a restoration of the 
 sway of law and order, and at any rate, if continued 
 as certain to lead to insolvency on the part of the 
 Government. 
 
 But to proceed with our Review. The average 
 expenditure of France in 1815-16, and 17, was 
 1,025,000,000 francs, £41,000,000.^ 
 
 The average expenditure of the years 1845-6, 
 and 7, was 1,573,000,000 francs, £6^,000,000. 
 
 The population ofFrance in 1817, was29,217,000. 
 In 1846, 35,400,000. The expenditure of France 
 in 1848, had risen to 1,817,000,000 francs, or 
 about £72,000,000. 
 
 It will be seen that to facilitate calculation, the 
 pound sterling is valued at 25 francs, rather less 
 than the usual exchange, but sufficiently near the 
 truth, when perfect exactness is not required. 
 
 * See Appendix III. — " The interest on the public debt of 
 France, amounted in 1814 to 102 millions of francs, in 1830 to 
 317 millions, in 1847 to 378 millions, and was expected to reach 
 452 millions, on January 1st, 1849, (this sum includes terminable 
 annuities and certain pensions, amounting to 57 millions, and 
 62 millions of sinking fund.") 
 
 Annuaire cTEconomie Politique, 1849, p. 78. 
 
40 
 
 We have already seen that the absolute expen- 
 diture of England has fallen from eighty-one mil- 
 lions to fifty-two millions, or 36 per cent, and her 
 relative expenditure, supposing her wealth to have 
 increased in an equal ratio with her population^ 
 that is, in the proportion of ^8 to 19, 53 per cent. 
 
 On the other hand, the absolute expenditure of 
 France has increased rather more than 50 per cent, 
 that is, from 1025 millions of francs to 1573 mil- 
 lions of francs, while her relative expenditure, 
 supposing her wealth to have kept pace with the 
 increase of her population, has been augmented 
 about 30 per cent. 
 
 The following calculations may help the reader 
 to form a clearer notion of the financial position of 
 the two countries, so far as respects the present 
 inquiry. 
 
 If the absolute expenditure of France had been 
 diminished like that of England, it would have been 
 in the three years ending with 1847, 1025 millions 
 less 36 per cent, or about 640 millions. 
 
 If the absolute expenditure of England had in- 
 creased like that of France, it would now amount 
 to fifty-two millions, plus twenty-six millions, or 
 seventy-eight millions. 
 
 Supposing us to look to the comparative expen- 
 diture, comparative we mean to the wealth of the 
 two countries, on the assumption that the wealth of 
 each has increased in an equal ratio with the popu- 
 lation, the account will stand as follows. 
 
41 
 
 In order to make the burden borne by France 
 exactly the same now as it was in the three years 
 1815-16, and 17, it should be 1025 millions, plus 
 20 per cent, or 1230 millions. The actual expense 
 has been i573 millions. 
 
 The actual expenditure of England during the 
 last years of the war, having been eighty-one 
 millions sterling, supposing the expenditure to 
 have increased pari passu with the population, it 
 would now amount to nearly 120 millions. If to 
 this sum we add 30 per cent, the proportion by 
 which the comparative expenditure of France has 
 been augmented, we shall reach the sum of 144 
 millions, which would be necessary upon the data 
 we have adopted, to preserve a fair equilibrium 
 between wealth and expenditure in the two countries. 
 If the two countries were equally burdened at the 
 close of the war, it follows that England is now 
 taxed comparatively with France in the proportion 
 of47tol30— in other words, that the former in 
 proportion to her wealth pays 71 per cent of taxes 
 less than the latter. 
 
 It may render this matter somewhat clearer and 
 more intelligible to the reader, to place these 
 results in another point of view. The expen- 
 diture of England at the close of the war being 
 eighty-one millions, and the population nineteen 
 millions, the former had reached the enormous 
 amount of £4. 55. per head. 
 
 At present the English expenditure is fifty-two 
 
4t 
 
 millions, for twenty-eight millions of people, or 
 about £1. 175. per head. 
 
 The expenditure of France in 1815-16, and 17, 
 having been 1025 millions of francs, borne by a 
 population of twenty-nine millions, was about £1. 85. 
 per head, it has been recently 1573 millions of 
 francs, for thirty- five millions of people, or about 
 £1. 135. per head. In the first year of the Republic, 
 it has indeed reached seventy-two millions sterling, 
 or £2. per head. 
 
 But even these several statements, which may 
 have perhaps fatigued the attention of the reader, 
 afford an imperfect view of the relative burdens of 
 the two countries, inasmuch as they take no account 
 of the difference in principle between the systems of 
 financial legislation pursued by them. 
 
 In France we see restrictions and protective 
 duties, studiously contrived to benefit certain classes 
 at the expense of the community. The duty on 
 foreign iron, intended to protect the dear and bad 
 iron produced at home, is said alone to cost that 
 country no less than £':2, 500,000. per annum, by 
 adding about £5. per ton to the cost of the 
 iron annually consumed — without taking into 
 account the sacrifice imposed upon almost every 
 branch of industry, by the high price and bad 
 quality of one of the most important instruments 
 of production. This is only one out of many similar 
 arrangements, and they are crowned by a military 
 conscription, which besides the other sacrifices im- 
 
43 
 
 posed by it on the French people, must be regarded 
 as a pecuniary tax of large though unascertained 
 magnitude. 
 
 England is totally free from a military conscription. 
 Her financial code has been gradually weeded from 
 the absurdities of the old mercantile theory, and 
 even the Navigation Laws, which have mainly 
 owed their permanence to the dogmas of that 
 theory, have ceased to exist. At any rate, taking 
 things as they are, it is certain that in the dif- 
 ference of principle between the financial legis- 
 lation of the two countries, lies concealed a vast 
 pecuniary burden on France, from which England 
 is altogether free. 
 
 What has preceded, seems to lead with a degree 
 of force, which amounts to moral demonstration, 
 to the following conclusions. That assuming any 
 given percentage of the National wealth, to be 
 abstracted for State purposes in England, the 
 amount so employed in France is greatly more than 
 double such a percentage. In other words, that a 
 Frenchman pays out of his income or fortune, more 
 than twice as much as is paid by an Englishman, 
 who may possess a similar fortune or income. 
 
 To many persons, who have imbibed the popular 
 doctrines on this subject, what has preceded will 
 appear almost paradoxical, in spite of the data 
 which support the conclusions arrived at. It may 
 be expedient then to take a glance at the subject 
 under a somewhat different point of view. We see 
 
44 
 
 that the actual expenditure of France during the 
 last years of the monarchy was about £l. 13s 
 per head of the population, and that under the 
 Republic it has reached £2. per head, while that of 
 Great Britain is about £1. 17^ per head. So far 
 then, there is no great difference between them. 
 But can any reasonable person doubt that the 
 population of the island of Great Britain is 
 more than twice as rich, as the equally numerous 
 population of any geographical section of France ? 
 Or that the excess of wealth, over the double 
 proportion of the former, will not supply the 
 deficiencies of Ireland, if any, so as to make that 
 proportion a correct estimate for the whole British 
 Islands. 
 
 As respects Ireland, we may remark, that she is 
 now stricken down by an accidental calamity, which 
 may turn out to be a crisis in her fate, and place 
 her in a new and improved condition, both socially 
 and economically. She is not at any rate in a normal 
 state, and however full of hope, for her future we 
 may be, as we are unable to form a correct estimate of 
 that future, we are compelled while comparing her 
 relative wealth with that of France, to regard her 
 as she was, before the appearance of the potato 
 disease. At that time the poverty and misery 
 of a large portion of her rural population was 
 greater probably than that of any equal portion of 
 the French population ; but looking* to the. superior 
 condition of Ulster and Leinster, and to the number 
 
45 
 
 of large and wealthy cities, such as Dublin, Cork, 
 Belfast and Waterford, &c. &c., which have no 
 counterpart in the poorer districts of France ; we 
 can hardly doubt, but that in the latter country, a 
 number of Departments containing eight millions of 
 people might be found, possessing on the whole less 
 wealth, than that which did, and perhaps still does 
 exist in Ireland. 
 
 On the whole we can hardly be wrong, or if 
 wrong at all, we are under the mark, in estimating 
 the wealth of the collective British Islands at 
 double that of France. If so, a system of taxation 
 which raises any given sum per head in the latter, 
 is doubly as severe, as one which raises an equal 
 sum per head in the former country. 
 
 It would be highly interesting and instructive to 
 subject the other great countries of the Continent, 
 to the same examination as that we have instituted 
 in the case of France, but it is very difficult to 
 obtain all the materials necessary for such a pur- 
 pose. Some details bearing on the subject will be 
 found in the Appendix. So much, however, at any 
 rate, may be safely assumed, that towards the 
 close, and soon after the termination of the revolu- 
 tionary war, the expenditure of the several Con- 
 tinental countries, which had been engaged in 
 that dreadful struggle, was at least as great in 
 proportion to their resources, as that of Great 
 Britain in proportion to hers, and that since that 
 period in these several countries, there has been 
 
46 
 
 no reduction of taxation and expenditure, or 
 increase of wealth similar in extent to what has 
 taken place here. If this be so, the conclusion 
 necessarily follows, that, at present their financial 
 burdens are heavier than ours. 
 
 It thus appears that we have arrived in the 
 progress of our researches at a negative as to the 
 truth of the second proposition, which forms the 
 popular opinion of England upon this branch of 
 financial statistics. This negative is absolute and 
 decided as respects France, less confidently ex- 
 pressed from the want of suflficient materials, but 
 probably no less true, as respects other great 
 European countries. Great Britain is not more 
 heavily taxed than its European neighbours, when 
 the comparative wealth of each is taken into 
 account, but the reverse. Her burdens are lighter, 
 and she has besides, the enormous advantage at 
 present of having shaken off the shackles of the 
 protective system, which may be considered as im- 
 posing taxes, which bring nothing to the Exchequer, 
 while other countries are still sufi^ering from it. 
 
 It would be interesting to extend our review 
 beyond the Atlantic to that giant Republic, which 
 is destined to spread the language, the laws, and 
 the traditions of England, over so large a portion 
 of the New World, but here again, materials fail 
 us. The expenditure of the Federal Government 
 may be readily known,* but that of the several 
 
 * De Tocqueville, vol. ii. p. 72. et seq. may be examined on this 
 subject. 
 
47 
 
 States, and of their numerous municipal bodies 
 which must be added to it, in order to arrive at a 
 result which could be compared to the general 
 expenditure of Great Britain, is less accessible to a 
 foreigner, and on the whole it seems impossible from 
 existing data to pronounce a decisive opinion as to 
 the comparative financial burdens of the English 
 and American people. It may be assumed on the 
 whole that the latter are in the best position in this 
 respect. The American tariff is higher, generally 
 speaking, than the British, and the direct taxation 
 of the several States, independent of the local imposts 
 on towns, counties, &c. is probably almost, if not 
 quite as burdensome as our property tax. Some 
 observations on militia duty considered as a tax will 
 find a place hereafter. Still there remain our poor- 
 rates, excise and stamps, and the heavy duties, 
 levied upon certain commodities, such as tea, sugar, 
 tobacco, malt, and spirits, to turn the scale against 
 England, even when her superior wealth has been 
 taken into the account. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 REMARKS ON THE SPIRIT OF ECONOMY EVINCED BY 
 THE ENGLISH GOVERNMENT. AS COMPARED WITH 
 THAT EXHIBITED BY FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS. 
 
 We have now examined two of the most impor- 
 tant propositions which form the creed of the Eng- 
 lish people upon matters of finance, and it only 
 remains, in order to complete the task of criticism, 
 that we should pass under review the third of the 
 propositions, into the truth or falsehood of which it 
 was originally proposed to examine, that, viz. which 
 pronounces the English Government to be eminently 
 prodigal in its expenditure, when this is compared 
 with the results obtained, or with the expenditure 
 of the Governments of other great and civilized 
 countries for similar purposes. 
 
 In order to discuss this question with any sort of 
 completeness, it would be necessary that we should 
 know exactly the sums raised in each country, 
 both by the State and by Municipal bodies, and 
 also the mode in which the sums so raised are ex- 
 pended. It has been already remarked, that the correct 
 attainment of this knowledge is almost impossible ; 
 that the requisite data are inaccessible, and that 
 even an attempt to explain and classify the figures 
 
49 
 
 which might be laid before the reader, could not 
 lead to an exact result. 
 
 In the previous chapters, the difficulty of com- 
 paring the expenditure of different countries was 
 avoided by the adoption of a mode of examination 
 which only required that the expenditure of a given 
 country at one period, should be compared with 
 that of the same country at another period This 
 system of comparison is inapplicable to the subject 
 of the present chapter. In it the expenditure of 
 different countries must be placed in opposition. 
 Perfect exactness in detail is not to be expected, 
 but it is hoped, that means have been procured 
 which will lead to a decision upon the general 
 question approaching to certainty. 
 
 It must be remarked, that a thorough examina- 
 tion of the comparative expenditure of different 
 countries, would raise many collateral questions, 
 both as to fact and opinion, the discussion of which, 
 however interesting and useful, would carry us 
 into too wide a field. A few of these, however, will 
 be pointed out. 
 
 The French Budget includes the expense of 
 collection ; not so the English. Here then a sum, 
 amounting annually to about four millions sterling,* 
 
 * In 1848, 564,154,000. This sum, however, includes the 
 Post Office Expences, j6 1,392,000, which are in truth the costs 
 of a vast industrial undertaking, and not the charge of collecting 
 a tax. The real costs of collection were £2,836,000. 
 
50 
 
 must be added to the latter, in order to make a fair 
 comparison. 
 
 Again, in the French Budget the charge for the 
 clergy is about 40,000,000 of francs, while in the 
 English Budget the corresponding charge, which 
 consists of the Regium Donum and trifling sums, 
 chiefly in the Colonies, does not probably exceed 
 £50,000.* 
 
 Public works are carried on in France at the 
 expense of the State to an extent which finds no 
 counterpart on this side the Channel. This cir- 
 cumstance, which is also true of most other Euro- 
 pean countries and of the United States in a less 
 degree, arises in some cases from the comparative 
 want of capital, in others from the absence of a spirit 
 of co-operation among individuals. The highly 
 centralized system of rule prevailing on the Con- 
 tinent, is another obstacle in the way of private 
 enterprise. 
 
 As to public charity, a great difference exists 
 between the Catholic and Protestant countries of the 
 Continent. In Protestant countries a Poor-law, 
 agreeing in essentials with ours, and sometimes 
 equally onerous, is found to exist, while in Catholic 
 countries the indigent are mainly left to the efforts 
 of private charity, aided occasionally by the public 
 exchequer, or by municipal contributions. 
 
 * The public works of France from 1830 to 1847, cost 54 
 millions sterling, 1,358,000,000 francs. — Anuuaire d' Economic 
 Politique, 1849, p. 71. 
 
.51 
 
 The octroi, *" or duty on articles brought into 
 towns, is a very heavy and pernicious impost in 
 France and some other countries, but happily un- 
 known in England. The produce is divided between 
 the central government and the municipalities. 
 
 Tithes have been generally abolished on the 
 Continent, while a tithe rent-charge exists here ; 
 but then comes the question — are tithes to be con- 
 sidered a tax ? They are rather a portion of rent, 
 appropriated to one party, the tithe-owner, while 
 the remaining portion of rent is appropriated to 
 another party, the proprietor of the soil. The 
 abolition of tithe would deprive the tithe-owner of 
 his share, and throw it entirely into the hands of 
 the proprietor of the soil, in the form of increased 
 rent. Tithe it is clear cannot constitute any burden 
 upon the consumer, inasmuch as it does not affect 
 price. . The same principle is applicable to the land 
 tax, and to the largest portion of the poor rate. 
 Indeed it may be applied to all imposts on real 
 property, which have existed long enough to 
 have produced their full effects on purchases 
 and sales ; such as the ** Impot foncier,"'|' or land 
 tax, which constitutes so important an item in all 
 Continental Budgets. In such cases there is a 
 
 * The octroi yielded at Paris in 1838, 31,930,961 francs. At 
 Lyons in 1830,2,307,330,22 francs. Macgregor's Commercial 
 Statistics, Vol. 1, p. 334-336. At Paris in 1849, 32,923,000 francs. 
 
 t The direct taxes in France for the rectified Budget of 1848, 
 stood at 613 millions of francs, or about 24 millions sterling. — 
 Annuaire d'Econ. Pol. 1849, p. 118. 
 
 D 2 
 
52 
 
 point of time, when the so called tax, from its 
 long existence, loses its previous character, and 
 assumes rather the character of an original share 
 in the proprietorship; and to abolish such a charge, 
 would be to give to the proprietor an additional 
 benefit, for which he has never paid the price, and to 
 which he has therefore no equitable claim. It may 
 however be remarked, that a Government which 
 possesses a large income in the character of co-pro- 
 prietor with the possessors of the soil, ought to be 
 in a condition to dispense with taxation to a pro- 
 portionate extent. 
 
 These questions are merely suggested, without 
 an attempt to solve them, because their discussion 
 would carry us too far, while at the same time, it 
 is expedient to avoid the suspicion that they have 
 been passed by unadvisedly. 
 
 In making a comparison between the actual 
 expenditure of different countries, with a view to 
 judge of the comparative spirit of economy which 
 at present actuates their governments, it is proper 
 to look mainly at that portion which is employed 
 for other purposes than the payment of interest on 
 the public debt. In the case of England this course 
 is especially necessary. Our debt was almost all 
 contracted before 1816, t^nd during a state of things 
 very different from the present. It amounted in 
 that year to 855 millions, and involved an annual 
 charge of £32,457,000. Since the general Peace 
 loans have occasionally been contracted, but on the 
 
53 
 
 whole both the capital and interest of the debt 
 have been diminished. In 1848 the former stood 
 at £809,755,000 ; the latter at £28,,^62,000. The 
 accusation of extravagance against the English 
 Government during the war, must be admitted ; and 
 if the same charge does not equally apply to the 
 expenditure of other countries during the same 
 period, the cause must be sought for, not in their 
 more economical spirit, but in their want of credit 
 at home and abroad, and in the poverty of their 
 citizens. At any rate, it would be most unfair to 
 impute to the English Government as it now 
 exists, the extravagance of thirty or forty years ago. 
 Let our present system answer for its own faults, and 
 for these alone. 
 
 Setting aside all consideration of the relative 
 burthen imposed upon this and other countries, by 
 their respective debts, we will proceed to compare 
 the active expenditure of England with that of 
 some of her neighbours. 
 
 The following table exhibits the annual ex- 
 penditure per head, of a few of the most 
 important civilized countries, casting aside the 
 passive charge, viz. that for the payment of interest. 
 It has been kindly prepared for me by my friend 
 Mr. G. R. Porter, of the Board of Trade, a 
 fact which can leave no doubt as to its general 
 accuracy ; I take this opportunity of expressing 
 my gratitude to that Gentleman for the assistance 
 which he has thus rendered me, and which I should 
 
54 
 
 have looked for in vain in other quarters ; I ought 
 to add, that this is only one out of many instances, 
 in which I have derived important help from his 
 industry, and profound statistical researches, com- 
 bined as they are, with an accurate knowledge of 
 the principles of economical science. 
 
 Table of expenditure for purposes other than the 
 payment of interest on debt, stated in English 
 money, and at per head of the population, 
 
 France — before the late Revolution 
 
 „ since „ 1848 
 
 Belgium 
 Spain 
 Prussia 
 Holland 
 
 Norway .... 
 United States — taking into account the expen 
 
 diture of the several States 
 Average of the above taking France at only i 
 
 ^1.6* . about i 
 
 ♦England, adding four millions for collection 
 
 Now it will at once strike the reader, that the 
 
 * The average annual expenditure during the years ending 
 5th January, 1847, 48 and 49, amounted, including costs of 
 collection, to £58,882,000, but in 1847, 5^2,854,000 was 
 employed in the redemption of debt, and these years compre- 
 hended the charge for the CaflPre War, and nearly two millions 
 disbursed to relieve distress in Ireland and Scotland. The ordi- 
 nary expenditure, therefore, did not reach 57 milUons, of which 
 the debt absorbed 28^ millions, leaving an active expenditure for 
 ordinary purposes, including costs of collection of about 28 
 millions. This has since been reduced. 
 
 1 
 
 £\ 6 
 
 4 
 
 1 11 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 
 18 
 
 3 
 
 10 
 
 7 
 
 18 
 
 4 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 16 
 
 4 
 
 19 
 
 4 
 
55 
 
 above figures even at the first glance, by no means 
 bear out the charge of extravagance usually brought 
 against the English Government. That its expen- 
 diture per head of the population, is less by nearly 
 one-third than that of France, and that it barely 
 exceeds that of Spain and of Holland. 
 
 The following observations will probably convince 
 the impartial reader, that the ordinary opinion on 
 this point is not merely adopted on insufficient data, 
 but that it is positively incorrect — being in fact 
 the reverse of the truth. 
 
 In comparing the active expenditure of England 
 with that of other countries, there are some 
 circumstances affecting the former, which deserve 
 especial consideration, as modifying the inferences, 
 which would follow from the simple relation between 
 their respective money amounts. Some of these 
 circumstances are to be sought for in the peculiar 
 condition of the British Islands. Others in the 
 structure of that mighty aggregation of States, 
 which we call the British Empire. 
 
 Among the former, we may mention the superior 
 condition of our population, both as regards their 
 money wages, and their understanding of what con- 
 stitutes the necessaries of life. The price of all 
 personal services is far higher in Great Britain than 
 in any other European country. The fact is found 
 to exist in almost every kind and grade of employ- 
 ment, whether involving corporeal or mental toil. 
 The agricultural labourer— the artizan — the ma- 
 
56 
 
 riner — the manufacturer —the mercantile or profes- 
 sional clerk— the lawyer, or physician, require a 
 higher remuneration in England than in any Con- 
 tinental State, often in a twofold, sometimes in a 
 three or fourfold ratio. In other words, the natural 
 price of labour, — that remuneration which labourers 
 of all kinds demand, and less than which they will 
 not accept, is far higher here, than in the rest of 
 Europe. Now the Government is an employer of 
 labour to an immense extent. Personal services con- 
 sume the far greater portion of its total expenditure 
 after the annual claims of the public creditor have 
 been satisfied. The State only obtains the number 
 of labourers it requires, by competing with other em- 
 ployers in a market, where the price of the commodity 
 is comparatively high. The British Government sub- 
 jects itself to the effects of competition in this respect 
 to an extent almost unknown in the rest of Europe, 
 by relying on free enlistment for its army and fleet, 
 instead of having recourse to a conscription which 
 relieves the National Exchequer, at the expense of 
 those who are called upon to undertake the burden 
 of military service, or of their families. On the 
 whole, it may be fairly assumed that the cost of 
 personal services, speaking generally, is nearly 
 twice as great in England, as in France, and nearly 
 three times as great in England, as in Austria, 
 Russia, or Sweden. 
 
 Closely connected with the superior condition of 
 the several classes of societv, is the fact, that Great 
 
57 
 
 Britain is a very expensive country. This circum- 
 stance is mainly owing to the productiveness of its 
 labour. An average Englishman, by working a 
 given time, will produce a commodity saleable in 
 those countries, which produce the precious metals, 
 or which have obtained them by exchange, for 
 much more gold and silver, than an average French- 
 man, or German, or Pole, will obtain for a commo- 
 dity upon which he has employed an equal time. It 
 follows from this, that the precious metals are cheap 
 in England,— in other words, that all other commo- 
 dities or services are dear, unless when England, as 
 is the case in many instances, possesses some special 
 advantage, conducive to cheapness. The English 
 Exchequer is thus paid in low-priced money, if 
 this expression may be excused, which usually does 
 not go so far as "the high-priced money of other 
 countries for internal purposes. 
 
 The high price of English labour is indeed 
 often recompensed to the employer by the superior 
 quality of the labour which he obtains. Thus it was 
 found advantageous to pay English labourers on the 
 French railways,^ twice as much as was paid to 
 Frenchmen, and English labourers were employed in 
 the reconstruction of Hamburg, after the great fire, 
 at much higher wages than would have satis- 
 fied natives of Germany. These facts somewhat 
 limit in point of extent the inferences to be drawn 
 from the greater apparent costliness of English, as 
 compared with foreign labour. There are, however, 
 
58 
 
 many operations which demand a specified time, 
 whatever may be the skill or energy of the operator, 
 here the superiority of the English labourer gives 
 no recompense to his employer for his higher 
 wages. At any rate, the British Government has 
 taken advantage of the better quality of its func- 
 tionaries of all classes, by employing fewer in 
 proportion than are found in other European 
 States. 
 
 The most striking contrast in the rate of pay- 
 ment to public ofl[icers in this and other countries 
 is to be found in the salaries of Judges, and other 
 legal functionaries. Thus while our Chancellor 
 receives £10,000 per annum, a Chief Justice, 
 £8000, — a Puisne Judge, £5000, and even a Judge 
 of a County Court, £1000. A first President of the 
 Court of Cassation, in France, has only 20,000 fr. or 
 £800, and a President of the Court of Appeal, sit- 
 ting at Paris, 18,000fr. or £720. The salaries in 
 theother Courts of Appeal are still less. A President 
 of the Court of first instance of the Department of 
 the Seine receives annually, 15,000fr. — £600. A 
 Procureur-General of the Republic, whose functions 
 somewhat resemble those of our Attorney-General, 
 receives in each Court as much as a President.* 
 
 The difiPerence between the remuneration of 
 
 * It must not be forgotten that in France paid legal function- 
 aries are far more numerous than in England. The expense of 
 the Ministry of Justice amounts to twenty-six millions of francs. 
 — -Annuaire d'Econ. Pol. 1849, p. 116. 
 
59 
 
 Ministers in France and England, is less conspi- 
 cuous than of legal functionaries. In the former 
 country, 48,000 fr.—£ 1900. In the latter, £5000. 
 Under the monarchy the salaries and emoluments 
 of Ministers in France, were much higher than at 
 present — perhaps higher all things considered than 
 in England. 
 
 Conclusions unfavourable to the economical 
 spirit of our Government, may, with apparent fair- 
 ness, be drawn from the above statement, and 
 it is probable indeed that a due discharge of the 
 duties which devolve on our high office-holders, 
 might be obtained at a cheaper rate than at present. 
 But the real cause and best excuse for these salaries 
 is in the high price of all personal services in this 
 country. It would be unseemly and inconvenient 
 to select Judges from among those members of the 
 Bar, whose talents, or knowledge of their profession 
 were insufficient to procure for them a large amount 
 of business, while the great incomes of able and 
 successful Barristers, would render them unwilling 
 to ascend the Bench for a scale of remuneration, 
 much less than the salaries now assigned to high 
 judicial officers. 
 
 In forming an opinion on the allowances to pub- 
 lic functionaries, it must also be recollected, that in 
 many countries, as in Russia for instance ; the 
 salary often forms only a portion, sometimes a small 
 portion of the income of a public officer. Other 
 gains, lawful or unlawful, largely contribute to it. 
 
60 
 
 This was the case formerly in England. At pre- 
 sent our office-holders are almost unexampled in 
 the history of the world for pecuniary probity, as 
 well as for talent and industry. We pay highly, 
 but we are at least ably and faithfully served. 
 
 The next and last circumstance to which it is 
 proper to advert, as modifying the conclusions to be 
 drawn from the expenditure of Great Britain as 
 compared with that of Continental Countries and of 
 the United States, are our Colonies, and our vast 
 foreign commerce. 
 
 It has been estimated that the annual cost of the 
 foreign possessions of Great Britain to the Mother 
 country is not less than from four to five millions 
 sterling * This large sum is composed mainly of 
 military and naval expenses, but also comprehends 
 the pay of many civil functionaries, and occasional 
 disbursements for war and public works. Our 
 foreign possessions consist of conquered countries, 
 like India and Ceylon, of Colonies properly so- 
 called, Canada, Australia, &c. and of military posts 
 
 * The sums issued from the Treasury in 1848 for Colonial and 
 Consular services, was £497,727. 3« 5c?. The cost of the staflf 
 for the troops stationed in the Colonies was 56100,213. 1 6s Sd, 
 The expense of carrying the mails to the Colonies greatly exceeds 
 the postage received, and the excess is a charge arising from 
 our connection with them. To this must be added the pay, 
 maintenance, and transportation of perhaps 30,000 men, stationed 
 in our foreign possessions, other than India, and of a portion of 
 the Fleet. Events like the Canadian Insurrection and the 
 Caflfre War, must also be taken into account. 
 
61 
 
 and positions, such as Gibraltar, Malta, &,c., occupied 
 with a political object. 
 
 The other European countries, possessing Colo- 
 nies of any importance are Spain, Holland, and 
 France. Owing to peculiar circumstances, Spain 
 is enabled to derive a revenue from her Colonies. 
 Holland, at any rate, spends little or nothing upon 
 her ultramarine possessions. Those of France are 
 unimportant, with the exception of Algeria, which 
 alone, however, costs nearly as much as all the 
 British Colonies, and foreign possessions put toge- 
 ther. 
 
 Even supposing that, from financial or other 
 considerations, Great Britain were to lose or to 
 give up all her foreign possessions, retaining 
 her enormous foreign trade, she might diminish 
 her land forces greatly ; but she would still be 
 compelled to maintain a fleet far larger than 
 would be requisite for the protection of the British 
 islands. In fact, some may think that only a small 
 portion of our naval forces are employed simply for 
 the defence of our colonies, irrespective of the pro- 
 tection of our trade, and of general political con- 
 siderations. But whether this be so or not, is a 
 question which has no importance as bearing upon 
 the present inquiry. Our object is merely to point 
 out that Great Britain is subject to an annual 
 charge of from four to five millions sterling for 
 a purpose which costs nothing to any other European 
 country, except France. 
 
62 
 
 Many readers may be of opinion that the main- 
 tenance of these costly foreign possessions, and 
 the expensive protection aflPorded to our com- 
 merce in every part of the world, is a fact which 
 at once fixes the charge of prodigality on the 
 British Government. That our Colonies ought to 
 pay their own expenses, or be abandoned, and that 
 the military positions held with political views are 
 not worth what they cost, or, in fact, anything. A 
 great deal might be said upon this point, a thorough 
 discussion of which would carry us far beyond the 
 limits prescribed for the present publication. It 
 need only be remarked, that if the retention of pos- 
 sessions, causing so heavy an expense, be a fault, it is 
 a fault which belongs not merely to the Govern- 
 ment, but to the British people. Let public opinion 
 pronounce as its fiat, that our Colonies shall be 
 made to defray the charges of governing and pro- 
 tecting them, or be given up, and they would 
 speedily cease to make a demand upon our Budget.* 
 
 At any rate it is clear, that the 195 per head 
 of the population, which at present forms our active 
 expenditure, comprehends a large sum, which is not 
 required by any other civilized country, except 
 France. A deduction of five millions from the 
 twenty-eight millions which we now expend, includ- 
 ing the cost of collection, would leave our active 
 expenditure in money per head very much less than 
 
 * For some excellent remarks on the management of Colonies, 
 see Porter's '* Progress of the Nation,'* p. 752, et seq. 
 
63 
 
 two-thirds that of France before the late revolution, 
 even allowing for Algeria ; less than that of Spain 
 and Holland, and very nearly the same as the average 
 expenditure of all the countries included in the 
 table given at page 54, which comprehends the 
 United States. 
 
 This being the case, let the readei' bear in mind, 
 the observations which have been presented to 
 him as to the expensiveness of England, and espe- 
 cially as to the absence of a conscription, and the 
 high price we are compelled to pay for all personal 
 services, and he can hardly fail to come to the con- 
 clusion that the charge of extreme prodigality 
 usually brought against the British Government 
 cannot be sustained. That this charge is disproved 
 when brought to the test of even a cursory exami- 
 nation, and that our political system, which, not- 
 withstanding its defects, still on the whole leaves 
 those of the Continent, so far behind it, as respects 
 the essential objects of Government, accomplishes 
 its object, all things considered, at a cheaper rate. 
 The popular doctrine upon this subject is manifestly 
 erroneous. To what extent cannot be fixed with 
 the same precision as was attained when the burden 
 of taxation in England was compared with what 
 exists in France, or even with the similar burdens 
 in the other large civilized countries of the world. 
 
 In coming to this conclusion, allowance must of 
 course be made for the larger amount raised in 
 England by municipal taxes than in most foreign 
 
64 
 
 countries, and for the charges which fall upon the 
 National Budget in the latter, but not in the former. 
 
 A comparison after the compensations rendered 
 necessary by the above consideration will somewhat 
 affect the direct conclusions deducible from a simple 
 statement of figures, but will not go far enough to 
 reverse the decision derived from them. 
 
 The attempts made in almost every European 
 country, excepting Great Britain, to interfere with 
 industry through the means of fiscal regulations, 
 involve an amount of sacrifice which cannot be 
 accurately measured, but which is probably far 
 greater than would be required to compensate for 
 our heavy municipal taxation. 
 
 In the United States, the attempt to protect 
 domestic producers against foreign competition by 
 fiscal regulations, has been recently abandoned in 
 words, and as a matter of principle. But, in fact, 
 the system continues to exist, and imposes a 
 heavy pecuniary burden on the American people. 
 Such is the result, especially of the Custom Duties 
 on cotton and woollen goods, on metals in a raw 
 state, or on their manufactured products. All such 
 goods are also produced, and some of them to an 
 immense amount in the United States, and the 
 American people at large is still compelled to pay 
 to a small section of its countrymen an unneces- 
 sarily high price for many articles of first necessity. 
 The rise of price consequent on the tax, applies 
 to all the manufactured cotton, and to all the iron 
 
65 
 
 consumed, whether obtained by foreign import or 
 by home production, but a duty is levied only on 
 what comes from abroad. The enhanced price of 
 what is produced at home is equally a tax, but is 
 altogether lost to the community. 
 
 It must not, however, be supposed, from what 
 precedes, that no extravagance can justly be 
 charged against the British Government, but only 
 that at least similar, and probably greater extrava- 
 gance is to be found in the disbursements of all 
 other Governments. The expenses of the dock- 
 yards, which have been so prominently brought 
 before the public, exhibit proofs of very flagrant 
 mismanagement on our part. This waste of the 
 national resources is calculated to throw great 
 discredit upon those persons whose duty it is to 
 superintend this important branch of the public 
 service. On the other hand, it may be doubted 
 if the effective force of either the army or navy 
 could be very largely reduced without depriving 
 us of that security against foreign attack or domestic 
 disturbance, which is so essential to a community 
 like ours. There is, probably, no fleet or army 
 which effects so much, in comparison with their 
 numerical force, as those of Great Britain. They 
 exhibit, indeed, a remarkable contrast with those 
 of the Continental powers in this respect. 
 
 The only portions of the British dominions where 
 a large diminution of the troops now maintained 
 could be safely adopted are the Colonies. In some 
 
of them it does appear, that wkh a system of rule 
 more consonant to the feelings of the inhabitants, 
 a considerable reduction might take place. This 
 remark applies especially to the North American 
 colonies. Our military posts, such as Gibraltar, &c. 
 could not be held safely with less numerous 
 garrisons than those which at present occupy them. 
 
 Some persons maintain that France would disband 
 a portion of her army if we would reduce ours. But 
 this could not be reckoned upon, at any rate to an 
 extent which would render such an anticipatory 
 step on our part safe or expedient. Our military 
 force is already so small that no neighbouring power 
 can attribute to it an offensive character. The 
 garrison of Paris is, perhaps, as numerous as the 
 whole force stationed in the British islands — and 
 350,000 regular troops are maintained in the inte- 
 rior of France. Is there the least chance that our 
 friends on the other side of the Channel would 
 reduce their home force to 100,000 men ? When 
 they shall have done so, we may then reduce our 
 home army without placing ourselves in their power. 
 Great Britain must not be left to the mercy of any 
 foreign state. Steam navigation has greatly affected 
 the question of invasion. A time may come when 
 nations may be induced to enter into mutual agree- 
 ments for the simultaneous reduction of their fleets 
 and armies. Every real friend of humanity would 
 welcome such an event. 
 
 A remark has been made already upon the heavy 
 
67 
 
 financial burdens, not apparent in the public ac- 
 counts, which arises from the existence of a military 
 conscription. In the United States the militia 
 affords an analogous instance in this respect. It 
 is difficult to ascertain whether this force is a reality 
 or a mere name ; but a calculation may be ventured 
 on, under the supposition that it receives a certain 
 amount of training. The number of militia enrolled 
 in the United States in 1848, was 1,888,000. Sup- 
 posing these citizen soldiers to have been called out 
 five days annually for the purpose of being drilled, 
 and that the loss of a day's employment to each man 
 is equivalent in money value to half a dollar, although 
 a dollar would not probably be an exaggerated 
 estimate in a country where personal services are 
 so dear, we have so far a total of 4,720,000 dollars. 
 Add to this, the charges falling on the separate 
 States arising from the militia — the outlay for 
 Volunteer corps, and the expense of the War De- 
 partment at Washington, in 1848, S9,533,000, 
 above £2,000,000, we shall find that the whole 
 cost of the land force in the United States, is 
 perhaps, nearly as large as that of the troops 
 stationed i;i the British Islands. If a calculation 
 could be made of the real cost to France of her 
 National Guard, taking the loss of time at two 
 francs, or twenty pence per head per day, the result 
 would surprise the reader, while the benefit of that 
 institution, has not been very apparent. 
 
 We should possess an important means of de- 
 
68 
 
 ciding the question, as to the comparative spirit 
 of economy in different Governments, could we 
 ascertain for each the expence per cent of collect- 
 ing the revenue — materials have not presented 
 themselves upon this matter, with respect to foreign 
 States, excepting in the case of France. In the 
 Appendix will be found a statement quoted by the 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer during the last Ses- 
 sion, which exhibits the cost of collection for 
 various branches of the revenue in France and in 
 England respectively during the year 1848. It 
 will be seen that these disbursements are far heavier 
 in the former country than in the latter, in the in- 
 direct taxes indeed in a double proportion. 
 
 It would be wrong, however, to pronounce at once 
 the opinion, that our Government merits the praise 
 of economy, as compared with that of France in the 
 proportion indicated by the simple figures of this 
 table. The necessary expenditure for collection 
 varies in the same country for different branches of 
 the revenue, and must differ still more in different 
 countries. This charge ceteris paribus ought to be 
 less in England than in France. All then that 
 can be inferred with confidence, is that the English 
 Government has taken full advantage of any supe- 
 riority it may possess, in this respect, when com- 
 pared with that of France. 
 
 To examine in detail the various circumstances 
 which determine the necessary expense of collect- 
 ing the revenue, would carry us too far. 
 
69 
 
 We have hitherto looked mainly at the comparative 
 money expenditure of various nations, we will now 
 cast a rapid glance at the evidence of the relative 
 economy of different Governments — which is afforded 
 by a comparison of the number of agents whom they 
 respectively employ. 
 
 Perhaps this task is even more satisfactory, 
 because requiring fewer allowances and compensa- 
 tions, than that derived from a comparison of their 
 money expenditure. 
 
 We will take first the number of persons em- 
 ployed in the various branches of the civil adminis- 
 tration. In 1885, these persons amounted in Great 
 Britain to '23,578*' at an annual cost of £2,786,000. 
 — and there is no reason to suppose that they have 
 materially increased since that period. Of the 
 numbers so employed in continental countries, no 
 knowledge approaching to accuracy is attainable, but 
 we can hardly err in assuming, that for each civil 
 functionary in England four or five civil functionaries 
 are to be found in most European countries, upon 
 the supposition not always correct, but the best in a 
 general view, that populations equal in amount 
 demand equal numbers of office-holders, and so in 
 proportion. The civil servants of Austria are said 
 to reach 120,000, and those of France are far 
 more numerous. Forty thousand persons are sup- 
 posed to be there employed under the Minister of 
 Finance alone. 
 
 Passing on to a comparison of the numbers em* 
 * Porter, page 545. 
 
70 
 
 ployed in the military and naval establishments of 
 different countries, we find that the standing forces 
 of Europe considerably exceed two millions, for an 
 aggregate population exceeding two hundred mil- 
 lions ; in short, that they form, upon an average, full 
 one per cent of the whole population, in many 
 countries far more. If, then, Great Britain were 
 to maintain an armed force in proportion to that of 
 her neighbours, she would have in pay more than 
 290,000 soldiers and sailors, but her actual forces 
 do not exceed about 160,000, and of these full half 
 of the army and a large proportion of the fleet are 
 permanently stationed at a distance from the United 
 Kingdom, leaving not more than 80,000 ashore and 
 afloat, for the protection of the latter. This of 
 course is more than two-thirds less than the compa- 
 rative number employed by our neighbours. 
 
 France, for instance, has seldom less than 400,000 
 soldiers with the colours, while her naval establish- 
 ments have recently employed nearly as many men, 
 and cost almost as much as ours ; and it may be 
 remarked, that these vast and expensive instruments 
 of war are not intended, like those of England, for 
 purposes of defence, but for purposes of offence, 
 excepting as the army may be required just now to 
 keep down a turbulent minority. No power thinks 
 of attacking France, or could do so with a chance of 
 success. 
 
 The military and naval forces of Russia, are 
 equally beyond her real requirements, they press in- 
 
71 
 
 conveniently on her population, and financial means, 
 and seriously obstruct her prosperity. 
 
 The great Powers of Central Europe are the less 
 culpable in this respect, as they are constantly 
 threatened by one or other of their colossal neigh- 
 bours. 
 
 It must be further recollected, that France, and 
 indeed most European Powers have large trained 
 reserves, which can be called into the ranks at a 
 short notice, and in some instances a National Guard 
 besides, while England has neither, nor any substi- 
 tute for them, excepting a few enrolled Pensioners, 
 the Yeomanry, and the Dockyard Battalions. 
 
 It is probable that the United States are about on 
 a par with England as to the numbers employed in 
 the civil administration, comparatis comparondis, 
 while their regular army consists of only 12,000 
 men. But it must be recollected, that they have 
 an immense body of Militia and Volunteers, and 
 that they can never be engaged in any but an 
 offensive war of .^their own choice. Were they 
 placed, like England, within sight of a country 
 until recently bitterly hostile, eager to wipe out the 
 imagined stain of past defeats, and still likely at 
 any moment to fall into the hands of a faction, 
 which might think its interests forwarded by a 
 foreign war, and which constantly maintained a 
 powerful fleet, and an army exceeding 400,000 
 men, besides a large reserve ; we have too much 
 respect for the prudence and patriotism of the 
 
72 
 
 Americans to doubt, that they would speedily in- 
 crease their armaments to an amount equal to, if 
 not exceeding those of Great Britain. 
 
 At any rate, the impartial reader will hardly fail 
 to acknowledge, that in the numbers of its civil and 
 military servants the British Government exhibits 
 a spirit of economy, which leaves it thus far without 
 a parallel in Europe. 
 
 In the Appendix will be found some tabular 
 statements connected with the subject of this pam- 
 phlet, which may interest the reader, although it 
 has not been thought necessary to enlarge upon the 
 inferences which may be derived from them. 
 
 In conclusion, it is only requisite to restate the 
 general results, to whicb we have been led. 
 
 It has been shewn in the first place, that the 
 financial burdens of Great Britain as compared with 
 her wealth, have been enormously diminished since 
 the Peace, and that they can impose no serious 
 obstacle to the progress of her prosperity. Secondly, 
 — That they are certainly far less heavy compared 
 with her means, than those of her nearest neighbour 
 France, — and probably less heavy, than those of 
 the other chief European countries. Thirdly, — 
 That although we cannot arrive at a conclusive and 
 indisputable judgment as to the charge of especial 
 prodigality often brought against the British 
 Government, yet that there is good reason for con- 
 sidering it to be unfounded, and indeed for the 
 
73 
 
 opposite opinion, viz. that the English get a better 
 return for their money paid in taxes than any other 
 European people, when all modifying circumstances 
 have been taken into account. 
 
 A few general remarks are reserved for another 
 and concluding chapter. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 GENERAL REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Let us suppose the case of the richest individual 
 in the country, a man of a generous and liberal 
 disposition, possessed of a splendid house and 
 establishment, and who, although his annual ex- 
 penses were greatly within his income, was haunted 
 hy the constant dread of insolvency, — and under 
 the influence of this vain apprehension, allowed 
 himself to be troubled at every small expense which 
 his steward might incur, and even to grudge the 
 trifling cost of locks and bolts for the protection of 
 his mansion against thieves, and of a few tiles, and 
 a little mortar, to repair the roof and keep out the 
 rain, which, without such repair, was likely to injure 
 the foundations ; or at any rate, to penetrate int 
 the chambers, and destroy the costly furniture. 
 
 Suppose again that this person, thus parsimo- 
 nious in some things, was usually most thoughtless 
 in what regarded his expenditure. That he was 
 ready to lend his money to any unprincipled schemer 
 or spendthrift, or to engage in the most imprudent 
 and senseless speculations, and thus annually dissi- 
 pated a greater sum than was required to maintain 
 his domestic establishment and every thing con- 
 nected with it, on the most splendid footing. 
 
 Suppose, in the last place, that this man, in spite 
 of all his losses and expenses, possessed so vast an 
 
75 
 
 income, that at the end of each year, on making up 
 his accounts, he found a very large addition had 
 been made to his capital, which he had great 
 difficulty in employing beneficially, should we not 
 consider him a very unreasonable and inexplicable 
 being — a strange mixture of generosity and niggard- 
 liness of prudence and folly ? 
 
 If he took us to counsel, should we not recom- 
 mend him to calm his dread of over-spending his 
 income, to give less credit to charlatans and impos- 
 tors, to engage in no unreasonable speculations, 
 and to employ a small portion of the money thus 
 saved in putting his mansion into the most perfect 
 repair, so as to avoid all risk from thieves and 
 weather, and to complete his establishment by 
 procuring anything that might be w^anting to make 
 it faultless as respected convenience and comfort. 
 
 Some readers may be tempted to doubt if anybody 
 at all resembling this individual can really be found ; 
 but assuming his existence, none would for a 
 moment hesitate in answering in the affirmative the 
 question thus put to them. Yet this personage 
 really does exist, not indeed as an individual, but 
 as representing the aggregate character and feeling 
 of our country. 
 
 The British people, in comparison with all other 
 nations, are exactly in the position of the person 
 thus pour tray ed. They are wealthy beyond pre- 
 cedent in past or present times. They are generous 
 and liberal in many things. They waste annually in 
 
76 
 
 bad debts and abortive speculations a sum larger 
 than the whole annual expenses of the State ; yet 
 they allow themselves to be persuaded that their 
 weal or woe depends upon some trifling increase or 
 diminution in a fraction of this expenditure. They 
 are sometimes seized with such a fit of parsimony, 
 that it is with the greatest difficulty they can be 
 persuaded to maintain the military and naval de- 
 fences of the country in such a condition as not to 
 invite hostile attack ; and at all times they are worse 
 prepared in this respect than any other civilized 
 people, although, from their social and economical 
 condition, they would suffer more than any other 
 from an interruption in the public tranquillity. 
 
 They expend less, comparatively, than any other 
 great community upon education, literature, art, 
 and science ; and when any proposal is made tend- 
 ing to promote these objects, it is constantly nega- 
 tived on the plea of the expense which it would occa- 
 sion. Thus we have no handsome and commodious 
 building to hold the pictures belonging to the nation. 
 The public records are rendered almost useless, 
 and exposed to destruction, for the want of some 
 spacious and well-contrived place of deposit; and our 
 cities and towns are without museums, public walks 
 and open spaces for the recreation and health of 
 their inhabitants, while the public health suffers 
 from defective sanitary arrangements, among which 
 we may especially point out the irreverent and 
 disgusting practice of intramural burials. 
 
77 
 
 The English people can well afford the very best 
 Government that money can secure, and they ought 
 to insist upon having such a Government. Those 
 who tell them that an excellent Government is to be 
 had for nothing are either ignorant on the subject 
 about which they speak, or they intentionally mis- 
 lead their hearers. On the other hand, the English 
 people should allow of no extravagance or pecu- 
 niary mismanagement on the part of their rulers. 
 This, if not ruinous, is at least foolish, unseemly, 
 and corruptive. 
 
 It is unnecessary to follow out the line of sugges- 
 tion thus opened up — that the reader can do for 
 himself; and we will, therefore, pass on to a few 
 observations arising from the present troubled 
 state of Europe, as connected with our subject. 
 
 Since the French Revolution of February, 1848, 
 almost every country of the Continent has been 
 convulsed by civil commotions. The popular mind 
 has never been so strongly excited during the long 
 interval which dates from the great religious 
 movement of the sixteenth century. Theological 
 disputes do not enter to any considerable extent 
 into this grand conflict of interest and opinion ; 
 but with that exception, almost every element 
 of social and political discord is in full activity. 
 We have noble and generous, although some- 
 times misdirected aspirations for freedom. The 
 hatred and opposition of races. The eagerness of 
 the middle classes to throw oif the chains im- 
 
78 
 
 posed by privilege, or by a complex and interf'erent 
 Bureaucratic centralization, and to secure the reins 
 of power for themselves. The efforts of ambi- 
 tious and unprincipled men to snatch the power 
 and profit, of which their late occupiers have 
 been deprived ; and finally, and above all, we have 
 the struggles of that class, the lowest and most 
 numerous in the social scale, to procure, by force, 
 those physical advantages of which they see others 
 in possession, and which they believe to be denied 
 to themselves, simply through the effect of un- 
 righteous legislation. During the last half century 
 a great advance has been made by every order 
 of men in respect of their economical condition. 
 All now consume better food and wear better 
 clothing than fell to the share of their predecessors 
 a generation or two ago. Steam engines, railroads, 
 &c. &c. have been as conducive to the comforts and 
 enjoyments of the poor, as to those of the rich. 
 Still, on the whole, the advance in the physical 
 and social condition of the poor has been less con- 
 spicuous than in that of the middle and upper 
 classes. There remains everywhere a quantity of 
 suffering arising from poverty, painful to the eye of 
 humanity, and the more keenly felt by those who en- 
 dure it, because they see more clearly than formerly 
 the luxury of those above them, and are more fully 
 persuaded that their sorrows and privations arise in 
 a great degree from the cruelty and selfishness of the 
 possessors of power. Thus, then, we have in full 
 
79 
 
 activity that struggle between '* those who have, and 
 those who have not," which has existed in one shape 
 or other since the institution of property. It is at all 
 times difficult to persuade mankind that their priva- 
 tions arise from their own fault, or from the necessary 
 circumstances of society. Speculative and benevolent 
 men, as well as political incendiaries, have felt this, 
 and have devised social systems which profess to 
 remedy the evils apparent in the existing order of 
 things. Hence we have Owenism, and St. Simo- 
 nianism, and Fourierism, and the Icarian scheme; the 
 various contrivances to modify or do away withiprivate 
 property, and to substitute what is called a co-ope- 
 rative for a competitive scheme of society. These 
 opinions, modified and diluted, have extended their 
 influence to men and classes, who doubtless imagine 
 that they have nothing in common with those whom 
 they look upon as anarchists. Yet the opposition 
 to the New Poor-law in England was partly based 
 upon doctrines which differ only in degree from 
 those of Louis Blanc, and which, if carried out, 
 would, perhaps, lead to consequences almost as 
 disastrous as '* the organization of labour." 
 
 All the vain dreams above alluded to, are directly 
 opposed to the doctrines of the best and greatest 
 Teachers of mankind. That man shall live by the 
 sweat of his own brow, and not upon the industry 
 of others. That our weal or woe even in this 
 world must mainly depend upon our own conduct. 
 That an attempt to enforce equality of condition on 
 
80 
 
 mankind, is as certain to fail, as would an attempt 
 to endue all mankind with the same intellectual, 
 and physical powers, or even the same stature. 
 That to take property forcibly from its possessors, 
 and to bestow it upon one great corporation formed 
 of all the members of society, is the surest mode to 
 destroy it. All these and many similar opinions, 
 are either the expressed doctrines of the wisest 
 philosophers, or are legitimate inferences from those 
 doctrines. Nobody can be more deeply convinced 
 of their truth than the author, nobody feels more 
 absolute confidence than he does in the failure of 
 any social or political scheme, which proceeds from, 
 or carries along with it any attack on the right of 
 private property, jit is very easy to plunder the 
 rich, to make them poor, but in so doing, to make all 
 the poor rich, is a result which neither legislative 
 skill, nor despotic power, can eflPect. Poverty and 
 wealth, like health and sickness, strength and weak- 
 ness, will exist as long as our race shall continue to 
 inhabit this earth, although it may be hoped, that 
 mainly through the growth of individual knowledge 
 and virtue, poverty will become less and less afflictive, 
 with each succeeding generation. One of the best 
 modes by which the legislator can accelerate this de- 
 sirable progress, is by taking a course directly opposed 
 to that advised by some of our fashionable teachers, 
 that is by rendering property even more secure than 
 at present, and by facilitating its transfer in greater 
 or smaller portions from one individual to another, 
 
81 
 
 in the hope that it may thus on the whole, although 
 with numerous exceptions, fall into the hands of 
 those, who most deserve, and will best employ it. 
 
 The influence of government on the happiness and 
 prosperity of nations and individuals is doubt- 
 less great — still this influence may be over-esti- 
 mated, and there is at present a tendency in the 
 public mind, to throw upon the sovereign authority, 
 whatever that may be, a degree of responsibility in 
 this respect far greater than fairly belongs to it. 
 
 The lines at the close of Goldsmith's Traveller, 
 which are understood to have proceeded from 
 the pen of Johnson, contain a great and im- 
 portant truth expressed with exquisite terseness 
 and beauty, — 
 
 " How small, of all that human hearts endure, 
 "That part, which laws or kings can cause or cure.'* 
 
 But although the wild doctrines of Communism, 
 and its kindred theories, if transferred from the 
 domain of speculation to that of actual practice be 
 doomed to inevitable failure. If the attempt to 
 make the poor rich, by forcible transfer of the pro- 
 perty of the opulent to them, can only tend to make 
 poverty general to all. If an effort to introduce at 
 once an equality of condition, be founded on a 
 misconception of the general tendencies of human 
 nature, and of the circumstances, which on the 
 whole are calculated to promote the widest exten- 
 sion of virtue and happiness. If the maintenance 
 
 F 
 
92 
 
 of the right of property to individuals in what they 
 have inherited or acquired, be a condition essen- 
 tially necessary to the progress of wealth and civili- 
 zation, it does not follow, that this right of property 
 possesses that peculiar character of prescriptive 
 holiness which some persons would attribute to it. 
 It lies not beyond the line of human legislation, but 
 within it, and is to be regarded by the light of con- 
 siderations drawn from public utility. 
 
 No divine injunctions interfere with the human 
 legislator, in dealing with questions of property. 
 The law of Moses left far less to the free disposal 
 of individuals as respects property than is now 
 thought consonant to the well-being of society. 
 The blessed Author of Christianity, while strongly 
 inculcating on his followers, kindness, bene- 
 volence, and charity, imposed no rules of action 
 which can oppose any obstacle to the freest exertion 
 of our reason in this important branch of social 
 economy. 
 
 The errors of the Communists respecting property, 
 if closely examined, seem to lie much more in their 
 rejection of the ordinary maxims of social and 
 political philosophy, than in the positive doctrines 
 which constitute the foundation of their opinions. 
 
 It may be allowed to them that the State, saving 
 an equitable compensation for existing interests, is 
 justified in regulating the possession of property in 
 such a wav as it deems most consistent with the 
 common good. One might even perhaps go so far 
 
83 
 
 as to allow that in an enlarged point of view, the 
 property now belonging by law to all the. persons 
 forming the State, may be regarded as belonging 
 to the whole community. This admission, however, 
 is quite compatible with an utter rejection of Com- 
 munistic views in general. 
 
 The opinion that all practical legislation con- 
 nected with property should be guided by the rule 
 of utility, would lead to a more enlarged view of 
 the duties of Government, as respects the mass of 
 the people than is usually entertained, or than will 
 perhaps be palatable to many readers. And here 
 the connecting link presents itself between what 
 has immediately preceded, and the main subject of 
 this pamphlet. 
 
 There are many objects conducive to the public 
 morality, health, or enjoyment, and involving ex- 
 penditure, for the providing which, through the 
 medium of taxation, the poorer members of the 
 community seem justified in calling for the aid of 
 their wealthier brethren. These objects are now 
 either insufficiently afforded, or not provided for at 
 all. As a specimen of these may be mentioned pro- 
 tection against foreign attack, or internal commotion. 
 The labouring class suffer more than any other, as we 
 have seen in France, from an interruption of public 
 tranquillity. This protection is provided for in 
 England to a certain extent, although less perfectly 
 than might be desired. Education, though first in 
 importance, may be mentioned next, and is recog- 
 
 f2 
 
84 
 
 nized by most of us, although not by all, as justifying 
 an outlay of public money. That more has not been 
 spent upon it, is mainly owing to the diflBculties arising 
 from differences of religious opinion. These diffe- 
 rences form an invincible obstacle to the providing 
 places of worship, and to the maintenance of Minis- 
 ters of Religion for the whole population at the 
 public expense, but there are other matters of ge- 
 neral utility, to which similar obstacles do not 
 exist, and where the duties of the State would seem 
 to be imperative. It would take up too much space, 
 and carry us out of our province to do more, than 
 allude to them. A few may be mentioned — Mu- 
 seums, Parks, and Gardens, near all great towns, 
 and open to all. Vacant spaces for athletic sports or 
 other recreation, in every parish in the country. 
 The best attainable sanitary arrangements. It is 
 pitiable to think that in many parts of the country, 
 the population, and especially the children, have no 
 other place for exercise than the dusty road. The en- 
 closure of Commons in most districts has gone quite 
 far enough, in many too far. Not that the poor 
 are thus deprived of any considerable pecuniary 
 advantage, but that they lose the means of innocent 
 diversion. The sight of wild nature is delightful 
 and invigorating, and it would be a matter of sincere 
 regret, if from an ill-considered system of economy, 
 such public possessions as the New Forest were to 
 be sold and divided. Rather let something be spent 
 in making them accessible to the Tradesmen and 
 
85 
 
 Artisans of the metropolis and other large towns, 
 and their families, if private enterprise will not do 
 this, as the object of a holiday excursion The 
 creation of the Victoria and Battersea Parks do credit 
 to the Statesmanship and kindliness of our age. 
 
 Before quitting this part of our subject, the 
 reader's attention may be usefully called to the 
 conduct of our brethren on the other side of the 
 Atlantic, as respects Education and Public Schools. 
 If in other respects, they study economy in the 
 public expenditure, according to some, even to a 
 fault, in their efforts to promote Education, they 
 are generous, and even wisely lavish. Mr. Mackie 
 (Western World, vol. 3. p. 235, et seq.) informs 
 us, that were Great Britain to devote fSj'SSSjOOO 
 to this object annually, instead of £100,000, she 
 would only place herself on a level with the State 
 of Connecticut. 
 
 Sir C. Lyell, (vol. 1, p. 191, second Tour,) states, 
 that Massachusetts is still more bounteous as respects 
 Education, and that seven millions spent by Great 
 Britain annually upon it, would only place her on 
 a footing of equality with her republican descendant. 
 
 The other New England States, and New York, 
 fall little behind Connecticut in the pecuniary 
 sacrifices which they make on behalf of Education, 
 All the remaining free States follow in the same 
 noble path. Even in the Slave States, the educa- 
 tion of the white population is not neglected by the 
 respective Governments. 
 
86 
 
 In one British possession. Nova Scotia, a large 
 sum, speaking comparatively, has been devoted to 
 education, and with the best results. 
 
 Expenses for the attainment of objects, such as 
 those just alluded to, should be thrown so far as 
 practicable on the municipalities, that is to say, on 
 towns, parishes, unions, and counties, rather than on 
 the general revenue of the State, and should be 
 chargeable not merely on real, but on personal pro- 
 perty also. There is no ground of justice or policy, 
 for excluding personal property from this new- 
 charge, although it would be inexpedient for many 
 reasons, to relieve real property from the burdens 
 in the shape of Poor and County Rates, &c., which 
 it has hitherto borne. 
 
 Among the other advantages which would arise 
 from making the description of charges here pointed 
 out municipal, rather than imperial, one of the most 
 important would be that of maintaining and even of 
 strengthening the principle and practice of self- 
 government among us. Those who have most atten- 
 tively regarded the existing troubles of the Conti- 
 nent, will feel most sensibly the enormous evils, 
 which How from the keeping a people in a state of 
 tutelage, and subject in all its political arrange- 
 ments to the control of a highly centralized admi- 
 nistration, whether the Bureaucracy emanate from 
 an Emperor or King, or from a Democratic Chamber. 
 Over-government is a great evil, and in the ascent 
 from the lowest to the highest authority, as much 
 
87 
 
 power should be left with each grade in the 
 hierarchical arrangement in an ascending order, as 
 it can properly employ. In this respect, the United 
 States can furnish important lessons. 
 
 We need not fear, that the measures above 
 suggested for the health, recreation, and mental 
 improvement of the mass of a community like 
 ours, could impose any severe burden on the posses- 
 sors of property. A moderate outlay once for all, 
 and an annual charge, which if equally distributed 
 would hardly be felt by the tax-payer, would fully 
 accomplish all that can be desired. A tithe of the 
 sum now annually wasted in abortive speculation, 
 as has been pointed out in the first chapter, would 
 probably supply all our wants under this head for 
 years. The line of policy here suggested involves no 
 novelty in legislation. It was widely adopted, how- 
 ever ill-directed, by the great nations of the ancient 
 world in their public games, religious festivals, and 
 theatrical representations ; and the Romans in 
 their distributions of relief to the poorer class, 
 carried it to a most pernicious excess ; for we must 
 never forget, that we usually create more misery 
 than we relieve, when we attempt to make up the 
 earnings of the labouring classes from the produce 
 of a tax, and to eraze from their minds a reliance 
 on their own industry, providence, and forbear- 
 ance, as the essential condition of their well- 
 being. The *' Circenses," which the Poet describes 
 as having been desired by the Roman people, might 
 
88 
 
 have been granted them without much injury had 
 these public spectacles been of a less brutalizing and 
 degrading character. It was the ** panem," and 
 not the " Circenses,'*' the largesses of food, &c., and 
 not the public games which proved, by undermining 
 their independence, an efficient c|iuse of their ruin, 
 and of the downfal of the Empire. 
 
 The English Poor-law may seem to fall under the 
 ban of the general principle, thus propounded. It 
 is unnecessary to point out the circumstances which 
 confer upon it, a highly exceptional character, and 
 make it on the whole an instrument of good, 
 although attended with some evils, and a constant 
 and 11 ost dangerous liability to abuse. 
 
 The religious festivals of Roman Catholic coun- 
 tries may be considered as the representatives of the 
 public amusements of antiquity, and as sanctioned 
 by a policy the same in principle as that now com- 
 mented on. 
 
 In the course of the preceding discussion, consi- 
 derations have been suggested, which to many per- 
 sons may appear of a very novel character, an I 
 conclusions have been arrived at in some respects 
 greatly opposed to the prevailing opinion. The 
 writer does not expect to escape hostile criticism ; 
 indeed, he invites the severest scrutiny of his facts 
 or arguments, under the conviction that he has 
 been guided throughout by a sincere intention to 
 discover and maintain the truth. He will rejoice if 
 lie has in any degree contributed to convince the 
 
89 
 
 public, that our fiscal burthens are not really 
 oppressive, and that all thit is requisite for m nn- 
 taining unimpaired the national faith, and for pro- 
 moting the security and prosperity of the English 
 people, so far as public expenditure is involved in 
 the realization of 4;hese important object s caLbe 
 attained without any undue pressure on our re- 
 sources. 
 
 Should the public attention be directed to ques- 
 tions connected with the positive and comparative 
 taxation of various countries, fresh facts will pro- 
 bably be discovered, calculated to throw light upon 
 them. It is possible that some errors may be de- 
 tected as to matters of detail in what has preceded, 
 or that doubts may be raised as to the correctness 
 of some of the arguments propounded ; but the 
 writer has no apprehension that his leading facts 
 can be shewn to be erroneous, or that the general 
 course of his reasoning can be successfully im- 
 pugned. 
 
 A just confidence in the abundance of her re- 
 sources for all necessary and useful purposes, and a 
 wise discrimination in selecting those purposes are 
 all that is requisite to establish the general well- 
 being, and to place the finances of the country, so 
 far as falls within the province of the Government, 
 on a solid foundation. 
 
 The accumulated capital of Great Britain, and 
 the annual addition made to it from the savings of 
 individuals, and the profits of successful enterprize. 
 
90 
 
 are large beyond calculation. The national industry 
 is applied with greater advantage, and is productive 
 of greater wealth than that of any other people. 
 
 We are no longer subjected to the heavy pecuniary 
 losses caused by the unwise commercial restrictions 
 which formerly existed, and to the evil effects of 
 which other countries are still subjected. 
 
 Under these favourable circumstances, we may, 
 without difficulty or interruption to the steady pro- 
 gress of our prosperity, find means of meeting every 
 fiscal demand which may be necessary for main- 
 taining public faith, for protection against foreign 
 attack, or domestic disturbance, for internal 
 improvements, or for the maintenance of every 
 institution belonging to a good Government, and 
 conducive to the social or moral progress of the 
 people. 
 
 We have only to believe ourselves rich, and we 
 are rich. We have only to place faith in our means, 
 and they will be found sufficient for every needful 
 or rational purpose. But real weakness may be 
 created by yielding to apprehensions, which have 
 their origin only in ignorance, and many of the 
 worst effects of national poverty may be produced 
 by an insufficient appreciation of the strength of our 
 resources, and by a short-sighted impatience of 
 fiscal pressure, which is really light in itself, and 
 utterly insignificant when compared with the value 
 and importance of the objects for the attainment of 
 which it is imposed. 
 
91 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Forter, p. 357-8. 
 
 Years. 
 
 OFFICIAL VALUE. 
 
 Real or declared 
 value of British 
 & Irish Produce 
 & Manufactures 
 Exported. 
 
 Imports of 
 Foreign and 
 Colonial Mer- 
 chandise. 
 
 Exports of 
 Foreign and 
 Colonial Mer- 
 chandise. 
 
 Exports of 
 
 British and Irish 
 
 Produce and 
 
 Manufactures. 
 
 1814 
 1815 
 1816 
 
 Average 3 Years 
 
 Deduct for "1 
 Depreciation > 
 of Bank Notes. J 
 
 1843 
 1844 
 1845 
 
 Average 3 Yeai's 
 
 £. 
 33,755,264 
 32,987,396 
 26,431,604 
 
 £. 
 19,365,981 
 15,748,554 
 13,480,780 
 
 £. 
 34,207,253 
 42,875,996 
 35,717,070 
 
 £. 
 45,494,219 
 51,603,028 
 41,657,873 
 
 94,174,264 
 
 48,595,315 
 
 112,800,319 
 
 138,755,120 
 
 31,391,421 
 
 16,198,438 
 
 37,600,106 
 
 46,251,706 
 9,250,341 
 
 70,093,353 
 85,441,555 
 75,281,958 
 
 13,956,113 
 14,397,246 
 16,280,870 
 
 117,877,278 
 131,564,503 
 134,599,116 
 
 37,001,365 
 
 52,278,449 
 58,584,292 
 60,111,081 
 
 230,816,866 
 
 44,634,229 
 
 314,040,897 
 
 170,973,822 
 
 76,938,955 
 
 14,878,076 
 
 128,013,632 
 
 56,991,274 
 
 The Trade of Transit exhibited in the 2nd column has increased but little. Dming 
 the War, England was the great Entrepot. 
 
9^ 
 
 
 ^■s 
 
 t^ o o 
 
 t>^ 
 
 Oi 
 
 •<T Oi CO 
 
 to 
 
 CM 
 
 
 lis 
 
 (M ?0 CO 
 
 «o 
 
 00 
 
 to o o 
 
 to 
 
 CM 
 
 
 t^ CN -H 
 
 
 CO 
 
 CM O^O 
 
 00 
 
 to 
 
 
 o S » 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i^^ 
 
 CO (NO 
 
 o 
 
 s 
 
 00 -To 
 
 to" 
 
 00 
 
 
 rf CO 00 
 
 to 
 
 TT — 00 
 
 ■^ 
 
 TT 
 
 
 Total) 
 
 paid & ( 
 
 in the 
 
 O^ 00 CM 
 
 o 
 
 «o 
 
 '-^C^I^CO^ 
 
 1^ 
 
 CM^ 
 
 
 irT 'xT ci 
 
 •o" 
 
 ^— 
 
 --^ cm'co 
 
 tS 
 
 CM 
 
 
 o o ci 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 to O to 
 
 to 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 .— 1 
 
 
 '3 , 
 
 00 o o 
 
 Ci 
 
 ^ 
 
 CO CTi O 
 
 CM 
 
 Tf 
 
 
 II. 
 
 00 Ci o 
 
 00 
 
 to 
 
 O 00 -^ 
 
 00 
 
 Ci 
 
 
 TT 00^-^^ 
 
 'T 
 
 Oi 
 
 CO -H 00 
 
 CO 
 
 tN. 
 
 
 "^^i 
 
 CO "xT^" 
 
 00 
 
 ^^ 
 
 cTc^f 00 
 
 _l 
 
 Co" 
 
 . 
 
 •^ QO O 
 
 Oi 
 
 oT 
 
 t^ to 00 
 
 ^-4 
 
 
 p 
 
 
 »<" o" o" 
 
 co^ 
 to 
 
 Oi 
 
 00 — Oi 
 
 -Too 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 2- 
 
 a d 
 
 r^ w «o 
 
 
 T* 
 
 CM CM Cl 
 
 to 
 
 CM 
 
 ^ 
 
 cjf^ 
 
 
 (M 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 edto 
 nof 
 t be- 
 nt of 
 ear. 
 
 
 
 
 — F— l-H 
 
 CO 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 
 rr «0 Oi 
 
 Oi 
 
 CO 
 
 p^ 
 
 
 
 
 t>»CO 00 
 
 Ci^ 
 
 CO 
 
 S 
 
 
 
 
 
 00 CO CO 
 
 to 
 
 tO*^ 
 
 
 
 
 o ^ 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 Sums a 
 redem 
 Public 
 yond a 
 Loans 
 
 
 
 
 to — 
 
 to 
 
 Oil 
 
 §.-, . 
 
 0> O "T 
 
 00 
 
 C<J 
 
 O Oi <N 
 
 ^^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 
 CO «o rv. 
 
 !>• 
 
 c^ 
 
 «0 to 1^ 
 
 Oi 
 
 Oi 
 
 
 Interest paid 
 
 PubUc Del 
 
 Funded an 
 
 Unfunded 
 
 <N CO O 
 
 o — «o 
 
 
 ". 
 
 ^TT 00 
 oTto CO 
 
 oo 
 
 Oi 
 
 
 CO o 1^ 
 
 to 
 
 »o 
 
 to Oi to 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 00 o-^" 
 
 
 CO 
 
 00^ 
 
 C< TT CM 
 
 C^O 00 
 
 o 
 oo" 
 
 CO^ 
 
 cT 
 
 
 CI CO CO 
 
 00 
 
 crT 
 
 CM CO CM 
 
 00 
 
 CM 
 
 
 
 
 CM 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ir: o c?i 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 r^ rr Ti« 
 
 to 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 ^ O "^ 
 
 l>. 
 
 Oi 
 
 — . .O to 
 
 CM 
 
 
 
 ^'-^CO 
 
 o 
 
 50 
 
 GO t>>vCO 
 
 Oi 
 
 ■^ 
 
 
 iCocTc^r 
 
 00^ 
 
 CM 
 
 CM CO O 
 
 to 
 
 to^ 
 
 
 5 'O 
 
 OJ Ci iC 
 
 "^r 
 
 00 
 
 00 o o 
 
 ■n- 
 
 to" 
 
 
 
 CO O -"T 
 
 00 irTc^r 
 
 to 
 
 CM 
 
 to o o^ 
 
 to 
 
 o^ 
 
 CM 
 
 
 o o o» 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 to to to 
 
 to 
 
 CO 
 
 
 r-l ^- 
 
 CO 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 '" 
 
 to 
 
 -^^ 
 
 CM CO t>> 
 
 C<l 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 > o 
 
 00 o o 
 
 o 
 
 r>I 
 
 
 
 
 
 '53 ^j 
 
 CM^O 00^ 
 
 o 
 
 Oi 
 
 
 
 
 
 oun 
 ans. 
 
 cTco -T 
 
 ^ 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 
 
 TT <0 "^ 
 
 to 
 
 rjT 
 
 
 
 
 §13 
 
 <o to C<l 
 
 
 00 
 
 : : : 
 
 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 1° 
 
 CO ^?<N 
 
 Oi 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 ^1,- 
 
 CO CO CM 
 
 00 
 
 CM 
 
 TT rr 
 
 to 
 
 CM 
 
 ■ ■ 
 
 «o O — ' 
 
 r>. 
 
 oj 
 
 1^ to to 
 
 CM 
 
 __^ 
 
 
 CO to it: 
 
 CO 
 
 Oi 
 
 — < t^ CO 
 
 Oi 
 
 "n* 
 
 
 ?|l 
 
 00 -^o 
 
 CO*^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 CM^CO"© 
 
 to 
 
 to 
 
 
 rr CO ^ 
 
 C3i 
 
 1^ 
 
 00 o to 
 
 TT 
 
 trT 
 
 
 s ^^ 
 
 t^ ^ <N 
 
 o 
 
 Ci 
 
 to o^o 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 Amou 
 
 venue 
 
 i Exc 
 
 00 -^oT 
 
 
 o^ 
 
 CM^rrCO 
 
 c^ 
 
 CM 
 
 
 ?o t^ t^ 
 
 (N 
 
 
 to to to 
 
 to 
 
 CO 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 
 Qi 
 
 
 
 a> 
 
 
 . 
 
 CO Tt »o 
 
 
 2 
 
 CO TT to 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 Tf TT TJ« 
 
 
 p 
 
 
 00 00 00 
 
 
 V 
 
 00 00 00 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 >• 
 
 
 
 
 PH 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 < 
 
93 
 
 III. 
 
 Since the above was written, I have discovered in Porter's 
 " Progress of the Nation," p. 506, a different, and probably a more 
 correct estimate of the population at the periods referred to than 
 that given in the text. 
 
 Mr. Porter calculates that the population stood thus : — 
 
 1813 19,076,000 
 
 1814 ..... 19,341,000 
 1815 19,606,000 
 
 58,023,000 
 
 Average of these years . . 19,341,000 
 And in 1845 . . . 28,041,000 
 
 The latter amount has been obtained by an addition of 1*065 per 
 cent each year to the ascertained population of 1 84 1 . This would 
 add about 280,000 to the estimate for every year up to 1849, 
 and raise the estimate for the latter year to about 29,100,000. 
 From this amount, however, would have to be deducted the 
 probable, although unascertainable reduction produced in Ireland 
 by the extra-mortality and vast emigration, resulting from the 
 potato disease. Upon this latter circumstance, however, it may 
 be remarked, that an increase or diminution of population in 
 Ireland can produce but a trifling effect on the tax-bearing capa- 
 bility of the United Kingdom. Ireland contributing only about 
 564,000,000 to the whole imperial revenue of fifty-two millions. 
 
 On the whole, I see no suflicient reason to alter the estimates 
 in the text to those of Mr. Porter, although the latter may be 
 more correct than mine. 
 
 Minute accuracy on such points is not necessary for the argu- 
 ment : which only requires proportionate results tolerably near the 
 truth. The relation of about nineteen to twenty-eight between 
 the population during the last years of the war and now is what 
 we both arrive at. 
 
IV. 
 
 AN ACCOUNT OF THE PUBLIC INCOME AND EXPENDITURE OF 
 FRANCE IN EACH YEAR, FROM 1802 TO 1848. 
 
 Years. 
 
 1802 
 1803 
 1804 
 1805 
 1806 
 1807 
 1808 
 1809 
 1810 
 1811 
 1812 
 1813 
 1814 
 1815 
 1816 
 1817 
 1818 
 1819 
 1820 
 1821 
 1822 
 1823 
 1824 
 1825 
 
 Income. 
 
 francs. 
 
 560,055,255 
 
 876,318,232 
 
 1,036,804,350 
 
 1,270,312,550 
 
 1,414.080,685 
 
 936,658,784 
 
 939,238,063 
 
 934,771,514 
 
 949,932,891 
 
 1,042,747,134 
 
 989,563,042 
 
 978,812,347 
 
 Expenditure. 
 
 francs. 
 589,500,000 
 632,279,513 
 804,937,555 i 
 700,000,000 
 902,148,490 
 731,726,686 
 772,744,445 
 786,740.214 
 785,000,442 
 1,006,014,000 
 1,000,000,000 
 975,453.797 
 572,293,587 I 
 931,441,404 I 
 1,055,854,028 | 
 1,189,253,628 
 1,433,746,666 \ 
 896,000,028 ' 
 906,729,666 
 908,344,345 
 949,174,982 
 1,118,025,162 
 986,073,842 
 981,972,609 
 
 Years. 
 
 Income. 
 
 1826 
 1827 
 1828 
 1829 
 1830 
 1831 
 1832 
 1833 
 1834 
 1835 
 1836 
 1837 
 1838 
 1839 
 1840 
 1841 
 1842 
 1843 
 1844 
 1845 
 1846 
 1847 
 1848 
 
 982,728,455 
 948,354,039 
 1,028,868,187 
 1,021,890,093 
 1,035,956,251 
 1,310,378,678 
 1,154,431,488 
 1,162,821,797 
 1,042,193,157 
 1,051,880,927 
 1,085,631,652 
 1,090,538,833 
 1,158,834,930 
 1,203,141,065 
 1,242,980,600 
 1,416,779,706 
 1,334,762,321 
 1,382,930,510 
 1,393,135,952 
 1,400,802,286 
 1,409,616,597 
 1,357,343,325 
 1,487,324,818 
 
 Expenditure. 
 
 francs. 
 976,948,919 
 986,534,765 
 1,024,100,637 
 1,014,914,432 
 1,095,142,115 
 1,219,310,975 
 1,174,350,197 
 1,134,072,914 
 1,063,559,443 
 1,047,207,680 
 1,065,899,158 
 1,078,902,494 
 1,135,184,820 
 1,178,690,702 
 1,363,711,102 
 1,425,239,623 
 1,440,974,148 
 1,445,265,741 
 1,428,133,943 
 1,489,432,099 
 1,560,525,592 
 1,664,372,390 
 1,817,642,708 
 
 V. 
 
 ACCOUNT OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES 
 OF EUROPE AND AMERICA. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Taxation 
 
 
 Population. 
 
 Revenue. 
 
 Charge for 
 Public Debt 
 
 Cliarge for 
 Army, &c. 
 
 Taxation 
 per head. 
 
 per head 
 exclusive 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 of Debt. 
 
 
 
 £. 
 
 £. 
 
 £. 
 
 *. 
 
 d. 
 
 *. d. 
 
 Austria 
 
 35,800,000 
 
 15,154.550 
 
 6,700,000 
 
 5,000,000 
 
 8 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 Bavaria 
 
 4,500,000 
 
 3,173,640 
 
 874,629 
 
 731,997 
 
 14 
 
 1 
 
 10 2 
 
 Belgium 
 
 4,335,319 
 
 4,704,490 
 
 1,2:2,539 
 
 1,597,600 
 
 21 
 
 8 
 
 15 10 
 
 Denmark .... K 
 Duchies ( 
 
 1,350,327 > 
 888,750 \ 
 
 1,869,794 
 
 445,725 
 
 
 16 
 
 8 
 
 12 8 
 
 Spain 
 
 12,386,841 
 
 12,577,805 
 
 1,269,800 
 
 3,633,700 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 18 3 
 
 France* 
 
 35,400,486 
 
 54,293,733 
 
 15,143,835 
 
 17,768,566 
 
 29 
 
 7 
 
 22 1 
 
 Pori;ugal 
 
 3,745,000 
 
 2,908,076 
 
 868,685 
 
 908,395 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 
 11 2 
 
 Holland 
 
 3,200,000 
 
 5,064,457 
 
 3,027,476 
 
 972,916 
 
 37 
 
 3 
 
 18 4 
 
 Prussia 
 
 16.000,000 
 
 9,905,205 
 
 1,404,305 
 
 3,865,575 
 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 10 7 
 
 Russia 
 
 54,092,300 
 
 20,000,000 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Sardinia 
 
 4,650,000 
 
 3,160,000 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 United States > 
 of America J! 
 
 20,000,000 
 
 9,959,166t 
 
 723,772 
 
 8,600,333 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 9 3 
 
 Venezuela 
 
 1,267,692 
 
 379,364 
 
 60,584 
 
 241,158 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 * The expenditure of France has been much larger recently, 
 t This sum includes the Expeaditiire of the several States. 
 
95 
 
 VI. 
 
 EXPENSES OF COLLECTION. 
 
 
 England- 
 
 -1848. 
 
 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 £. 
 
 £. 
 
 Taxes . 
 
 . af3 6 2 
 
 . , 10,166,000 . . 
 
 341,000 
 
 Stamps . 
 
 . 2 4 4 
 
 . . 7,670,009 . . 
 
 163,800 
 
 Excise . 
 
 . 5 18 2 
 
 . . 13,919,000 . . 
 
 922,900 
 
 Customs 
 
 . 5 15 3 
 
 . . 21,655,000 . . 
 
 1,304,000 
 
 
 . 63 
 
 ^53,410,000 . . 
 
 2,731,700 
 
 Post Office . 
 
 
 
 France — 1848. 
 
 Per cent. Francs. Francs. 
 
 Contributions directes .4 . . 226,040,000 . . 17,218,000 
 Enregistrement, Domaines, 
 
 et Timbre . . . 5 . . 214,869,000 . . 11,359,000 
 
 Douanes . . . 13 . . 193,823,000 . . 25,790,000 
 
 Contributions Indirectes 12-69. . 169,325,000 . . 21,435,000 
 
 f. 804,057,000 . . 75,802,000 
 Post Office . . 70 
 
 This account does not comprehend the whole produce of 
 Taxation in France. 
 
 G. NORMAN, PRINTER, MAIOSN LANE, COVENT GARDEN. 
 
.j^n 
 
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 BERKELEY 
 
 Return to desk from which borrowed. 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 AUG 4 1953 iU 
 
 ,D 21-100m-9,'48iB399sl6)476 
 
^B /7947 
 
 M20f;608 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA UBRARY