Total
interest
of debt con tracted by the war .
Edmund Burke
G.
has always defended himself upon the same ground, for the insufficient provision he made for the discharge of that debt.
The reader may see their own authority for it.
*
** " The navy bills are not due till six months after they have been issued; six months also of the senmen's wages by act of Parliament must be, and in consequence of the rules prescribed by that act, twelve months' wages generally, and often much more are retained; and there has been besides at all times a large arrear of pay, which, though kept in the account, could never be claimed, the persons to whom it was due having left neither assignees nor representatives. The precise amount of such sums cannot be ascertained ; but they can hardly he reckoned less than thirteen or fourteen hundred thousand pounds. On 31st Dec. , 1754, when the navy debt was reduced nearly as low as
it could be, it still amounted to 1,296,567]. 18s. 111d. consisting chiefly of articles which could not then be d|scharged ; such articles wiil be larger now, in proportion to the increase of the establishment; and an
? ? ? "1
Mr. G. did in fact provide no more than 2,150,000l. for the discharge of these bills in two years. It is much to be wished that these gentlemen would lay their heads together, that they would consider well this matter, and agree upon something. For when the scanty provision made for the unfunded debt is to be vindicated, then we are told it is a very small part of that debt which carries interest. But when the public is to be represented in a miserable condition, and the consequences of the late war to be laid before us in dreadful colors, then we are to be told that the un funded debt is within a trifle of ten millions, and so large a portion of it carries interest that we must not compute less than 3 per cent upon the whole.
In the year 1764, Parliament voted 650,000l. to wards the discharge of the navy debt. This sum could not be applied solely to the discharge of bills carrying interest; because part of the debt due on seamen's wages must have been paid, and some bills carried no interest at all. Notwithstanding this, we find by an account in the journals of the House of Commons, in the following session, that the navy debt carrying interest was, on the 31st of December, 1764, no more than 1,687,442l. I am sure therefore that I admit too much when I admit the navy debt carrying interest, after the creation of the navy an nuities in the year 1763, to have been 2,200,000l. Add the exchequer bills; and the whole unfimded
allowance must always be made for them in judging of the state of the navy debt, though they are not distinguishable in the account. In providing for that which is payable, the principal object of the legislature is always to discharge the bills, for they are the greatest article; they bear an interest of 4 per cent; and, when the quantity Of them is large, they are a heavy incumbrance upon all money trans2w tions. "
? OBSERVATIONS ON A LATE PUBLICATION'
? ? ? ? on rnn PRESENT sum or rnn NATION.
305
debt carrying interest will be four millions instead of ten ; and the annual interest paid for it at 4 per cent will be 160,000l. instead of 5299,250l. An error of no small magnitude, and which could not have been owing to inadvertency.
The misrepresentation of the increase of the peace establishment is still more extraordinary than that of the interest of the unfunded debt. The increase is great, undoubtedly. However, the author finds no fault with and urges only as matter of argu ment to support the strange chimerical proposals he
to make us in the close of his work for the increase of revenue. The greater he made that establishment, the stronger he expected to stand in argument: but, whatever he expected or proposed, he should have stated the matter fairly. He tells us that this es
tablishment nearly 1,500,000l. more than was in 1752, 1753, and other years of peace. This he has done in his usual manner, by assertion, without troubling himself either with proof or probability. For he has not given us any state of the peace establish
ment in the years 1753 and 1754, the time which he means to compare with_the present. As am obliged to force him to that precision, from which he always flies as from his most dangerous enemy, have berm at the trouble to search the journals in
the period between the two last wars: and find that the peace establishment, consisting of the navy, the ordnance, and the several incidental expenses, amounted to 2,346,594l. Now this writer wild
enough to imagine, that the peace establishment of 1764 and the subsequent years, made up from the same articles, 3,800,000l. and upwards? His as
sertion however goes to this. But must take the 70],. l. 20
? ? ? I
is
a
is
I
I
I
it
is
it,
is
it
? 306 OBSERVATIONS ON A LATE PUBLICATION
liberty of correcting him in this gross mistake, and from an authority he cannot refuse,"from his favorite work, and standing authority, the Gonsiderations. _" We find there, p. 43,* the peace establishment of 1764 and 1765 stated at 3,609,70Ol. This is near two hundred thousand pounds less than that given in " The State of the Nation. " But even from this, in order to render the articles which compose the peace establishment in the two periods correspondent (for otherwise they cannot be compared), we must
deduct first, his articles of the deficiency of land and malt, which amount to 300,000l. They certainly are no_ part of the establishment; nor are they included in that sum, which'I have stated above for the estab lishment in the time of the former peace. If they were proper to be stated at all, they ought to be stated in both accounts. We must also deduct the deficiencies of funds, 202,400l. These deficiencies are the difference between the interest charged on the public for moneys borrowed, and the produce of the taxes laid for the discharge of that interest. Annual provision is indeed to be made for them by Parlia
? * Navy . .
Army . . . . . .
Ordnance . . . . . . .
The four American governments .
General surveys in America .
Foundling Hospital . . . . .
To the African committee . . .
For the civil establishment on the coast of Africa
Militia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000_
. .
Deficiency of land and malt . Deficiency of funds . . . . . . Extraordinaries of the army and navy
Total
. . . .
.
.
. . .
19,200 1,600 38,000 13,000 5,500
. . ? 1,450,900 . 1,268,500 . 174,600
. . ? 3,609,700
300,000 202,400 3 5, 000
? ? ? 0N rnn PRESENT surn or rnn NATION.
ment: but in the inquiry before us, which is only what charge is brought on the public by interest paid or to be paid for money borrowed, the utmost that the author should do, is to bring into the account the full interest for all that money. This he has done in p. 15; and he repeats it in p. 18, the very page I am now examining, 2,614,892l. To comprehend afterwards in the peace establishment the deficiency
of the fund created for payment of that interest, would be laying twice to the account of the war part of the same sum. Suppose ten millions borrowed at 4 per cent, and the fund for payment of the interest to produce no more than 200,000l. The whole an
nual charge on the public is 400,000l. It can be no more. But to charge the interest in one part of the account, and then the deficiency in the other, would be charging 600,000l. The deficiency of funds must therefore be also deducted from the peace establish ment in the "Considerations "; and then the peace establishment in that author will be reduced to the
Peace establishment in the " Considerations " Deduct deficiency of land and malt ? 300,000 Dittooffunds . . . . . . . . 202,400
Peace
establishment before the late war, in which no deficiencies of land and malt, or funds are included . . . . . . . ' . .
Difference . . .
2,346,594 ? 760,706
"ii
3,107,300
502,400
307
? same articles with those included in the sum I have already mentioned for the peace establishment before the last war, in the year 1753, and 1754.
? 3,609,700
? ? ? 308
Hi'
OBSERVATIONS ON A LATE PUBLICATION
Being about half the sum which our author has
been pleased to suppose it.
Let us put the whole together. The author states, --
Difference of peace establishment before and
since the war . . . . . . . . . . . ? 1,500,000 Interest of debt contracted by the war . . 2,614,892
The real difference in the peace estab
lishment is . . . . The actual interest of the
. . . . ? 760,706
? 2,315,642 160,000
2,475,642
funded debt, that charged sinking fxmd
including on the
4,114,892
? . . . The actual interest of un
funded debt at most . .
Total interest of debt con tracted by the war . .
Increase of peace establishment,
newdebt . . . . . ; . . . . . . 3,236,348
Error of the author . . . . ? 878,544
lt is true, the extraordinaries of the army have been found considerably greater than the author of the " Considerations" was pleased to foretell they would be. The author of "The Present State" avails himself of that increase, and, finding it suit his purpose, sets the whole down in the peace establish mcnt of the present times. If this is allowed him, his error perhaps may be reduced to 700,000l. But I doubt the author of the " Considerations " will not thank him for admitting 200,000l. and upwards, as the peace establishment for extraordinaries, when that author has so much labored to confine them within 35,000l.
and interest of
? ? ? on THE PRESENT surn or THE NATION.
309
These are some of the capital fallacies of the au thor. To break the thread of my discourse as little as possible, I have thrown into the margin many in stances, though God knows far from the whole of his inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and want of common
care. I think myself obliged to take some notice of them, in order to take ofl" from any authority this writer may have ; and to put an end to the deference which careless men are apt to pay to one who boldly arrays his accounts, and marshals his figures, in per fect confidence that their correctness will never be examined. *
? * Upon the money borrowed in 1760, the premium of one per cent was for twenty-one years, not for twenty; this annuity has been paid eight years instead of seven ; the sum paid is therefore 640,000l. instead of 560,000l. ; the remaining term is worth ten years and a quarter instead of eleven years;* its value is 820,000l. instead of 880,000l. ; and the whole value of that premium is l,460,000l. instead of l,440,000l. The like errors are observable in his computation on the additional capital of three per cent on the loan of that year. In like manner, on the loan of 1762, the author computes on five years'
payment instead of six; and says in express terms, that take 5 from 19, and there remain 13. These are not errors of the pen or the press; the several computations pursued in this part of the work with
great diligence and earnestness prove them errors upon much deliber ation. Thus the premiums in 1759 are east up 90,000l. too little, an error in the first rule of arithmetic. " The annuities borrowed in 1756 and 1758 are," says he, "to continue till redeemed by Parlia ment. " He does not take notice that the first are irredeemable till Feb ruary, 1771, the other till July, 1782. In this the amount of the pre miums is computed on the time which they have run. Weakly and
ignorantly ; for he might have added to this, and strengthened his ar gument, such as it is, by charging also the value of the additional one per cent from the day on which he wrote, to at least that day on which these annuities become redeemable. To make ample amends, however, be has added to the premiums of 15 per cent in 1759, and three per
' See Smart and Demoivre.
? ? ? 310 OBSERVATIONS on A LATE PUBLICATION
However, for argument, I am content to take his
state of it. The debt was and is enormous. The
war was expensive. The best economy had not per haps been used. But I must observe, that war and economy are things not easily reconciled; and that the attempt of leaning towards parsimony in sucha state may be the worst management, and in the end the worst economy in the world, hazarding the total
loss of all the charge incurred, and of everything along with it.
But cui bom all this detail of our debt? Has the author given a single light towards any material re duction of it? Not a glimmering. We shall see in its place what sort of thing he proposes. But before he commences his operations, in order to scare the public imagination, he raises by art magic a thick mist before our eyes, through which glare the most ghastly and horrible phantoms:
'Hunc igitur terrorem animi tenebrasque necesse est, Non radii solis, neque lucida tela diei
Discutiant, sed naturse species ratioque.
Let us therefore calmly, if we can for the fright into which he has put us, appreciate those dreadful and deformed gorgons and hydras, which inhabit the joy less regions of an imagination fruitful in nothing but the production of monsters.
His whole representation is founded on the sup
cent in 1760, the annuity paid for them since their commencement; the fallacy of which is manifest; for the premiums in these cases can be neither more nor less than the additionalcapital for which the pub lic stands engaged, and is just the same whether five or five hundred years' annuity has been paid for it. In private life, no man persuades himself that he has borrowed 200l. because he happens to have paid twenty years' interest on a loan of 100l.
\
? ? ? ? on THE PRESENT surn or rnn NATION. 3'11
posed operation of our debt, upon our manufactures, and our trade. To this cause he attributes a. certain supposed dearness of the necessaries of life, which must compel our manufacturers to emigrate to cheap er countries, particularly to France, and with them the manufacture. Thence consumption declining, and with it revenue. He will not permit the real balance of our trade to be estimated so high as 2,500,000l. ; and the interest of the debt to foreigners carries ofl" 1,500,000l. of that balance. France is not in the same condition. Then follow his wailings and lamentings, which he renews over and over, according
? to his custom-- a declining trade, and decreasing spe cie--on the point of becoming tributary to France --of losing Ireland--of having the colonies torn away from us.
The first thing upon which I shall observe is,* what he takes for granted as the clearest of all propositions, the emigration of our manufacturers to France. I undertake to say that this assertion is totally groimd less, and I challenge the author to bring any sort of proof of it. If living is cheaper in France, that is, to be had for less specie, wages are proportionably lower. No manufacturer, let the living be what it will, was ever known to fly for refuge to low wages. Money is
the first thing which attracts him. Accordingly our wages attract artificers from all parts of the world. From two shillings to one shilling, is a fall in all men's imaginations, which no calculation upon a dif ference in the price of the necessaries of life can com
pensate. But it will be hard to prove that a French artificer is better fed, clothed, lodged, and warmed, than one in England; for that is the sense, and the
* Pages 30-32.
? ? ? 312
OBSERVATIONS on A LATE PUBLICATION
only sense, of living cheaper. If, in truth and fact, our artificer fares as well in all these respects as one in the same state in France, ---how stands the matter in point of opinion and prejudice, the springs by which people in that class of life are chiefly actuated? The idea of our common people concerning French living is dreadful; altogether as dreadful as our au thor's can possibly be of the state of his own country; a way of thinking that will hardly ever prevail on them to desert to France)"
But, leaving the author's speculations, the fact is, that they have not deserted; and of course the man ufacture cannot be departed, or departing, with them. I am not indeed able to get at all the details of our manufactures ; though, I think, I have taken full as much pains for that purpose as our author. Some I have by me; and they do not hitherto, thank God, support the author's complaint, unless a vast increase of the quantity of goods manufactured be a proof of losing the manufacture. On a view of the registers in the West Riding of Yorkshire, for three years be fore the war, and for the three last, it appears, that the quantities of cloths entered were as follows:
? 1752 .
1753 .
1754 .
Pieces broad. . 60,724
. 55,358
. 56,070
172,152
. . .
. . .
Pieces narrow. 72,442 71,618 72,394
216,454
* In a course of years a few manufacturers have been tempted abroad, not by cheap living, but by immense premiums, or set up as masters, and to introduce the manufacture. This must happen in every country eminent for the skill of its artificers, and has nothing to do with taxes and the price of provisions.
? ? ? ON THE PRESENT STATE OF THE NATION.
1765
1766
1767
3 years, ending 1767 3 years, ending 1754
. . . . . .
. . . .
. .
77,419 78,888 78,819
205,181 210,454
18,077
.
III crease
In this manner this capital branch of manufacture has increased, under the increase of taxes; and this not from a declining, but from a greatly flourishing period of commerce. I may say the same on the best authority of the fabric of thin goods at Halifax; of
the bays at Rochdale ; and of that infinite variety of admirable manufactures that grow and extend every year among the spirited, inventive, and enterprising
traders of Manchester.
A trade sometimes seems to perish when it only as
sumes a different form. Thus the coarsest woollens were formerly exported in great quantities to Russia. The Russians now supply themselves with these goods. But the export thither of finer cloths has increased in proportion as the other has declined. Possibly some parts of the kingdom may have felt something like a languor in business. Objects like trade and man ufacture, which the very attempt to confine would certainly destroy, frequently change their place ;
and thereby, far from being lost, are often highly
.
Pieces broad. 54,000 72,575
102,428
229,663 172,152
57,511
313 ' Pieces nanow.
? Thus some manufactures have decayed 1:1 the west and south, which have made new and
improved.
'
shoots when transplanted into the And here it is impossible to pass by, though
more vigorous
north.
the author has said nothing upon the vast addi tion to the mass of British trade, which has been
? ? it,
? 314
ossnavarxons on A LATE PUBLICATION
made by the improvement of Scotland. What does he think of the commerce of the city of Glasgow, and of the manufactures of Paisley and all the adjacent country? has this anything like the deadly aspect and facies Hippocratica which the false diagnostic of our state physician has given to our trade in general? Has he not heard of the iron-works of such magni tude even in their cradle which are set up on the Carron, and which at the same time have drawn nothing from Sheffield, Birmingham, or Wolver hampton?
This might perhaps be enough to show the entire falsity of the complaint concerning the decline of our manufactures. But every step we advance, this mat ter clears up more ; and the false terrors of the author are dissipated, and fade away as the light appears. " The trade and manufactures of this country (says he) going to ruin, and a diminution of our revenue from consumption must attend the loss of so many seamen and artificers. " Nothing more true than the general observation : nothing more false than its ap plication to our circumstances. Let the revenue on consumption speak for itself : --
Average of net excise, since the new du
ties, three years ending 1767 . . . ? 4,590,734
'
Average increase . . . ? 1,329,040
Here is no diminution. Here on the contrary, an immense increase. This owing, shall be told, to the new duties, which may increase the total bulk, but at the same time may make some diminution of the produce of the old. Were this the fact, would
? Ditto before the new duties, three years
ending1759 . . . . . . . . 3,261,694
? ? it
is
is, I
? ON THE PRESENT srarn or THE NATION. 315
be far from supporting the author's complaint. It might have proved that the burden lay rather too heavy; but it would never prove that the revenue
from consumpticm was impaired, which it was his busi ness to do. But what is the real fact? Let us take, as the best instance for the purpose, the produce of the old hereditary and temporary excise granted in the reign of Charles the Second, whose object is that of_ most of the new impositions, from two averages, each of eight years.
Average, first period, eight years, ending
1754. . . . . . . . . . . . ? 525,317
? Ditto, second period, eight years, ending 1767. . . . . .
** " The navy bills are not due till six months after they have been issued; six months also of the senmen's wages by act of Parliament must be, and in consequence of the rules prescribed by that act, twelve months' wages generally, and often much more are retained; and there has been besides at all times a large arrear of pay, which, though kept in the account, could never be claimed, the persons to whom it was due having left neither assignees nor representatives. The precise amount of such sums cannot be ascertained ; but they can hardly he reckoned less than thirteen or fourteen hundred thousand pounds. On 31st Dec. , 1754, when the navy debt was reduced nearly as low as
it could be, it still amounted to 1,296,567]. 18s. 111d. consisting chiefly of articles which could not then be d|scharged ; such articles wiil be larger now, in proportion to the increase of the establishment; and an
? ? ? "1
Mr. G. did in fact provide no more than 2,150,000l. for the discharge of these bills in two years. It is much to be wished that these gentlemen would lay their heads together, that they would consider well this matter, and agree upon something. For when the scanty provision made for the unfunded debt is to be vindicated, then we are told it is a very small part of that debt which carries interest. But when the public is to be represented in a miserable condition, and the consequences of the late war to be laid before us in dreadful colors, then we are to be told that the un funded debt is within a trifle of ten millions, and so large a portion of it carries interest that we must not compute less than 3 per cent upon the whole.
In the year 1764, Parliament voted 650,000l. to wards the discharge of the navy debt. This sum could not be applied solely to the discharge of bills carrying interest; because part of the debt due on seamen's wages must have been paid, and some bills carried no interest at all. Notwithstanding this, we find by an account in the journals of the House of Commons, in the following session, that the navy debt carrying interest was, on the 31st of December, 1764, no more than 1,687,442l. I am sure therefore that I admit too much when I admit the navy debt carrying interest, after the creation of the navy an nuities in the year 1763, to have been 2,200,000l. Add the exchequer bills; and the whole unfimded
allowance must always be made for them in judging of the state of the navy debt, though they are not distinguishable in the account. In providing for that which is payable, the principal object of the legislature is always to discharge the bills, for they are the greatest article; they bear an interest of 4 per cent; and, when the quantity Of them is large, they are a heavy incumbrance upon all money trans2w tions. "
? OBSERVATIONS ON A LATE PUBLICATION'
? ? ? ? on rnn PRESENT sum or rnn NATION.
305
debt carrying interest will be four millions instead of ten ; and the annual interest paid for it at 4 per cent will be 160,000l. instead of 5299,250l. An error of no small magnitude, and which could not have been owing to inadvertency.
The misrepresentation of the increase of the peace establishment is still more extraordinary than that of the interest of the unfunded debt. The increase is great, undoubtedly. However, the author finds no fault with and urges only as matter of argu ment to support the strange chimerical proposals he
to make us in the close of his work for the increase of revenue. The greater he made that establishment, the stronger he expected to stand in argument: but, whatever he expected or proposed, he should have stated the matter fairly. He tells us that this es
tablishment nearly 1,500,000l. more than was in 1752, 1753, and other years of peace. This he has done in his usual manner, by assertion, without troubling himself either with proof or probability. For he has not given us any state of the peace establish
ment in the years 1753 and 1754, the time which he means to compare with_the present. As am obliged to force him to that precision, from which he always flies as from his most dangerous enemy, have berm at the trouble to search the journals in
the period between the two last wars: and find that the peace establishment, consisting of the navy, the ordnance, and the several incidental expenses, amounted to 2,346,594l. Now this writer wild
enough to imagine, that the peace establishment of 1764 and the subsequent years, made up from the same articles, 3,800,000l. and upwards? His as
sertion however goes to this. But must take the 70],. l. 20
? ? ? I
is
a
is
I
I
I
it
is
it,
is
it
? 306 OBSERVATIONS ON A LATE PUBLICATION
liberty of correcting him in this gross mistake, and from an authority he cannot refuse,"from his favorite work, and standing authority, the Gonsiderations. _" We find there, p. 43,* the peace establishment of 1764 and 1765 stated at 3,609,70Ol. This is near two hundred thousand pounds less than that given in " The State of the Nation. " But even from this, in order to render the articles which compose the peace establishment in the two periods correspondent (for otherwise they cannot be compared), we must
deduct first, his articles of the deficiency of land and malt, which amount to 300,000l. They certainly are no_ part of the establishment; nor are they included in that sum, which'I have stated above for the estab lishment in the time of the former peace. If they were proper to be stated at all, they ought to be stated in both accounts. We must also deduct the deficiencies of funds, 202,400l. These deficiencies are the difference between the interest charged on the public for moneys borrowed, and the produce of the taxes laid for the discharge of that interest. Annual provision is indeed to be made for them by Parlia
? * Navy . .
Army . . . . . .
Ordnance . . . . . . .
The four American governments .
General surveys in America .
Foundling Hospital . . . . .
To the African committee . . .
For the civil establishment on the coast of Africa
Militia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000_
. .
Deficiency of land and malt . Deficiency of funds . . . . . . Extraordinaries of the army and navy
Total
. . . .
.
.
. . .
19,200 1,600 38,000 13,000 5,500
. . ? 1,450,900 . 1,268,500 . 174,600
. . ? 3,609,700
300,000 202,400 3 5, 000
? ? ? 0N rnn PRESENT surn or rnn NATION.
ment: but in the inquiry before us, which is only what charge is brought on the public by interest paid or to be paid for money borrowed, the utmost that the author should do, is to bring into the account the full interest for all that money. This he has done in p. 15; and he repeats it in p. 18, the very page I am now examining, 2,614,892l. To comprehend afterwards in the peace establishment the deficiency
of the fund created for payment of that interest, would be laying twice to the account of the war part of the same sum. Suppose ten millions borrowed at 4 per cent, and the fund for payment of the interest to produce no more than 200,000l. The whole an
nual charge on the public is 400,000l. It can be no more. But to charge the interest in one part of the account, and then the deficiency in the other, would be charging 600,000l. The deficiency of funds must therefore be also deducted from the peace establish ment in the "Considerations "; and then the peace establishment in that author will be reduced to the
Peace establishment in the " Considerations " Deduct deficiency of land and malt ? 300,000 Dittooffunds . . . . . . . . 202,400
Peace
establishment before the late war, in which no deficiencies of land and malt, or funds are included . . . . . . . ' . .
Difference . . .
2,346,594 ? 760,706
"ii
3,107,300
502,400
307
? same articles with those included in the sum I have already mentioned for the peace establishment before the last war, in the year 1753, and 1754.
? 3,609,700
? ? ? 308
Hi'
OBSERVATIONS ON A LATE PUBLICATION
Being about half the sum which our author has
been pleased to suppose it.
Let us put the whole together. The author states, --
Difference of peace establishment before and
since the war . . . . . . . . . . . ? 1,500,000 Interest of debt contracted by the war . . 2,614,892
The real difference in the peace estab
lishment is . . . . The actual interest of the
. . . . ? 760,706
? 2,315,642 160,000
2,475,642
funded debt, that charged sinking fxmd
including on the
4,114,892
? . . . The actual interest of un
funded debt at most . .
Total interest of debt con tracted by the war . .
Increase of peace establishment,
newdebt . . . . . ; . . . . . . 3,236,348
Error of the author . . . . ? 878,544
lt is true, the extraordinaries of the army have been found considerably greater than the author of the " Considerations" was pleased to foretell they would be. The author of "The Present State" avails himself of that increase, and, finding it suit his purpose, sets the whole down in the peace establish mcnt of the present times. If this is allowed him, his error perhaps may be reduced to 700,000l. But I doubt the author of the " Considerations " will not thank him for admitting 200,000l. and upwards, as the peace establishment for extraordinaries, when that author has so much labored to confine them within 35,000l.
and interest of
? ? ? on THE PRESENT surn or THE NATION.
309
These are some of the capital fallacies of the au thor. To break the thread of my discourse as little as possible, I have thrown into the margin many in stances, though God knows far from the whole of his inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and want of common
care. I think myself obliged to take some notice of them, in order to take ofl" from any authority this writer may have ; and to put an end to the deference which careless men are apt to pay to one who boldly arrays his accounts, and marshals his figures, in per fect confidence that their correctness will never be examined. *
? * Upon the money borrowed in 1760, the premium of one per cent was for twenty-one years, not for twenty; this annuity has been paid eight years instead of seven ; the sum paid is therefore 640,000l. instead of 560,000l. ; the remaining term is worth ten years and a quarter instead of eleven years;* its value is 820,000l. instead of 880,000l. ; and the whole value of that premium is l,460,000l. instead of l,440,000l. The like errors are observable in his computation on the additional capital of three per cent on the loan of that year. In like manner, on the loan of 1762, the author computes on five years'
payment instead of six; and says in express terms, that take 5 from 19, and there remain 13. These are not errors of the pen or the press; the several computations pursued in this part of the work with
great diligence and earnestness prove them errors upon much deliber ation. Thus the premiums in 1759 are east up 90,000l. too little, an error in the first rule of arithmetic. " The annuities borrowed in 1756 and 1758 are," says he, "to continue till redeemed by Parlia ment. " He does not take notice that the first are irredeemable till Feb ruary, 1771, the other till July, 1782. In this the amount of the pre miums is computed on the time which they have run. Weakly and
ignorantly ; for he might have added to this, and strengthened his ar gument, such as it is, by charging also the value of the additional one per cent from the day on which he wrote, to at least that day on which these annuities become redeemable. To make ample amends, however, be has added to the premiums of 15 per cent in 1759, and three per
' See Smart and Demoivre.
? ? ? 310 OBSERVATIONS on A LATE PUBLICATION
However, for argument, I am content to take his
state of it. The debt was and is enormous. The
war was expensive. The best economy had not per haps been used. But I must observe, that war and economy are things not easily reconciled; and that the attempt of leaning towards parsimony in sucha state may be the worst management, and in the end the worst economy in the world, hazarding the total
loss of all the charge incurred, and of everything along with it.
But cui bom all this detail of our debt? Has the author given a single light towards any material re duction of it? Not a glimmering. We shall see in its place what sort of thing he proposes. But before he commences his operations, in order to scare the public imagination, he raises by art magic a thick mist before our eyes, through which glare the most ghastly and horrible phantoms:
'Hunc igitur terrorem animi tenebrasque necesse est, Non radii solis, neque lucida tela diei
Discutiant, sed naturse species ratioque.
Let us therefore calmly, if we can for the fright into which he has put us, appreciate those dreadful and deformed gorgons and hydras, which inhabit the joy less regions of an imagination fruitful in nothing but the production of monsters.
His whole representation is founded on the sup
cent in 1760, the annuity paid for them since their commencement; the fallacy of which is manifest; for the premiums in these cases can be neither more nor less than the additionalcapital for which the pub lic stands engaged, and is just the same whether five or five hundred years' annuity has been paid for it. In private life, no man persuades himself that he has borrowed 200l. because he happens to have paid twenty years' interest on a loan of 100l.
\
? ? ? ? on THE PRESENT surn or rnn NATION. 3'11
posed operation of our debt, upon our manufactures, and our trade. To this cause he attributes a. certain supposed dearness of the necessaries of life, which must compel our manufacturers to emigrate to cheap er countries, particularly to France, and with them the manufacture. Thence consumption declining, and with it revenue. He will not permit the real balance of our trade to be estimated so high as 2,500,000l. ; and the interest of the debt to foreigners carries ofl" 1,500,000l. of that balance. France is not in the same condition. Then follow his wailings and lamentings, which he renews over and over, according
? to his custom-- a declining trade, and decreasing spe cie--on the point of becoming tributary to France --of losing Ireland--of having the colonies torn away from us.
The first thing upon which I shall observe is,* what he takes for granted as the clearest of all propositions, the emigration of our manufacturers to France. I undertake to say that this assertion is totally groimd less, and I challenge the author to bring any sort of proof of it. If living is cheaper in France, that is, to be had for less specie, wages are proportionably lower. No manufacturer, let the living be what it will, was ever known to fly for refuge to low wages. Money is
the first thing which attracts him. Accordingly our wages attract artificers from all parts of the world. From two shillings to one shilling, is a fall in all men's imaginations, which no calculation upon a dif ference in the price of the necessaries of life can com
pensate. But it will be hard to prove that a French artificer is better fed, clothed, lodged, and warmed, than one in England; for that is the sense, and the
* Pages 30-32.
? ? ? 312
OBSERVATIONS on A LATE PUBLICATION
only sense, of living cheaper. If, in truth and fact, our artificer fares as well in all these respects as one in the same state in France, ---how stands the matter in point of opinion and prejudice, the springs by which people in that class of life are chiefly actuated? The idea of our common people concerning French living is dreadful; altogether as dreadful as our au thor's can possibly be of the state of his own country; a way of thinking that will hardly ever prevail on them to desert to France)"
But, leaving the author's speculations, the fact is, that they have not deserted; and of course the man ufacture cannot be departed, or departing, with them. I am not indeed able to get at all the details of our manufactures ; though, I think, I have taken full as much pains for that purpose as our author. Some I have by me; and they do not hitherto, thank God, support the author's complaint, unless a vast increase of the quantity of goods manufactured be a proof of losing the manufacture. On a view of the registers in the West Riding of Yorkshire, for three years be fore the war, and for the three last, it appears, that the quantities of cloths entered were as follows:
? 1752 .
1753 .
1754 .
Pieces broad. . 60,724
. 55,358
. 56,070
172,152
. . .
. . .
Pieces narrow. 72,442 71,618 72,394
216,454
* In a course of years a few manufacturers have been tempted abroad, not by cheap living, but by immense premiums, or set up as masters, and to introduce the manufacture. This must happen in every country eminent for the skill of its artificers, and has nothing to do with taxes and the price of provisions.
? ? ? ON THE PRESENT STATE OF THE NATION.
1765
1766
1767
3 years, ending 1767 3 years, ending 1754
. . . . . .
. . . .
. .
77,419 78,888 78,819
205,181 210,454
18,077
.
III crease
In this manner this capital branch of manufacture has increased, under the increase of taxes; and this not from a declining, but from a greatly flourishing period of commerce. I may say the same on the best authority of the fabric of thin goods at Halifax; of
the bays at Rochdale ; and of that infinite variety of admirable manufactures that grow and extend every year among the spirited, inventive, and enterprising
traders of Manchester.
A trade sometimes seems to perish when it only as
sumes a different form. Thus the coarsest woollens were formerly exported in great quantities to Russia. The Russians now supply themselves with these goods. But the export thither of finer cloths has increased in proportion as the other has declined. Possibly some parts of the kingdom may have felt something like a languor in business. Objects like trade and man ufacture, which the very attempt to confine would certainly destroy, frequently change their place ;
and thereby, far from being lost, are often highly
.
Pieces broad. 54,000 72,575
102,428
229,663 172,152
57,511
313 ' Pieces nanow.
? Thus some manufactures have decayed 1:1 the west and south, which have made new and
improved.
'
shoots when transplanted into the And here it is impossible to pass by, though
more vigorous
north.
the author has said nothing upon the vast addi tion to the mass of British trade, which has been
? ? it,
? 314
ossnavarxons on A LATE PUBLICATION
made by the improvement of Scotland. What does he think of the commerce of the city of Glasgow, and of the manufactures of Paisley and all the adjacent country? has this anything like the deadly aspect and facies Hippocratica which the false diagnostic of our state physician has given to our trade in general? Has he not heard of the iron-works of such magni tude even in their cradle which are set up on the Carron, and which at the same time have drawn nothing from Sheffield, Birmingham, or Wolver hampton?
This might perhaps be enough to show the entire falsity of the complaint concerning the decline of our manufactures. But every step we advance, this mat ter clears up more ; and the false terrors of the author are dissipated, and fade away as the light appears. " The trade and manufactures of this country (says he) going to ruin, and a diminution of our revenue from consumption must attend the loss of so many seamen and artificers. " Nothing more true than the general observation : nothing more false than its ap plication to our circumstances. Let the revenue on consumption speak for itself : --
Average of net excise, since the new du
ties, three years ending 1767 . . . ? 4,590,734
'
Average increase . . . ? 1,329,040
Here is no diminution. Here on the contrary, an immense increase. This owing, shall be told, to the new duties, which may increase the total bulk, but at the same time may make some diminution of the produce of the old. Were this the fact, would
? Ditto before the new duties, three years
ending1759 . . . . . . . . 3,261,694
? ? it
is
is, I
? ON THE PRESENT srarn or THE NATION. 315
be far from supporting the author's complaint. It might have proved that the burden lay rather too heavy; but it would never prove that the revenue
from consumpticm was impaired, which it was his busi ness to do. But what is the real fact? Let us take, as the best instance for the purpose, the produce of the old hereditary and temporary excise granted in the reign of Charles the Second, whose object is that of_ most of the new impositions, from two averages, each of eight years.
Average, first period, eight years, ending
1754. . . . . . . . . . . . ? 525,317
? Ditto, second period, eight years, ending 1767. . . . . .
