The ftate of the FINANCES is firft taken into confideration. Thefe, he informs us, are fo much injured in confequence of the fpeculations and decrces of the affembly, that they can never be restored, unlefs a totally different fyftem is adopted. He enters, at confiderable length, into this queftion; and though it is impoffible for any but financiers, and thofe, too, converfant with French finance, to follow him with precision, and to determine with refpect to the accuracy of his feveral items, yet we fhall endeavour to give a brief statement. Before the prefent Revolution, the furplus of the annual expenditure above the annual fupply, or in other words, the annual deficiency, is ftated to have been 56,230,000 livres. This is compared with the prefent deficiency, which confifts of the combined amounts of, 1ft, the ancient deficiency; and, 2dly, the new deficiency, arising from the diminution of the revenue, and the increafe of the expenditure; deducting the amount of proposed œconomical favings.-It remains afterward to inquire by what means the affembly will fupply this deficiency. M. DE CALONNE'S general ftatement of the prefent deficiency is as follows: Livres. 155,770,000 75,476,000 80,294,000 119,200,000 these } 56,230,000 255,724,000 Here, then, we fee, in an incredibly fhort space of time, an increase of above 199 millions of deficiency. This immenfe fum may probably induce readers to think with us, that many of the items are estimated too highly; and that fome are mere temporary expences, and as fuch ought not to have been estimated at all, or at least only by their intereft, as adding to an annual deficiency others may perhaps think that the taxes, which have been decreed in augmentation of the revenue, should have been here brought in oppofition to the diminution of revenue: nor probably will they be convinced of the contrary by the plea which is urged, that thofe taxes are not yet productive; becaufe this is only a temporary drawback, and he is fettling a conftant and annual deficiency, It is our opinion, that it beft fuited I H fuited M. DE CALONNE's purpose to keep the ftatement of the increased expenditure at a diftance from that of the increased revenue; left, by having too eafy an opportunity of comparing them together, we might have found, what would by no means affift his argument, that the increafe in the latter was not unequal to the increase in the former. We shall not forget this circumstance, when we come to inquire into the ftate of the revenue; in the mean time, we fhall endeavour to follow M. DE CALONNE's fteps. The next article, which is noticed as tending to the utter ruin of the finances of France, is the increase of the national debt within the laft three years. We purpofely avoid entering into the particulars of this; we take his own ftatement. The national debt, to the beginning of 1787, was According to the committee of finances, the prefent debt is Livres. 3,020,000,000 4,241,000,000 The increafe, according to them, confequently is 1,239,000,000 According to M, DE CALONNE's statement, it amounts to 1,255,000,000 Thus, then, here is an increase of debt of above 1200 millions, and an annual deficiency of 250 millions: how is this to be paid? Two modes are propofed: 1ft, by the creation of newaffignats on the national domains: 2dly, by a general new modelling of all the contributions, by which their amount may be rendered equal to the neceffary expenditure. These projects are feparately difcuffed. The confequences of creating new affignats are first inveftigated. M. DE CALONNE profeffes that he is an enemy to this papermoney; for fuch he contends that it is, its circulation being forced, and itself not being at all times convertible into specie. He contends that, in proportion to its increafe, gold becomes more scarce; and that the circulation of real money is ftill more impeded by the ruinous expedient of iffuing affignats for fmall fums. He points out the total want of refemblance between the French paper and our bank notes; which being for large fums, circulating voluntarily, and being at all times convertible into gold, are both convenient and beneficial: He afks, what must be the opinions of the people of France, with regard to a paper money, which, (though, at its first emiffion, it was propped up by an intereft of 3 per cent.) now bears from 5 to 6 per cent. difcount. He quotes the opinion of the Bishop of Autun, of M. de Landine, and of M. Necker, in confirma Q94 tion tion of his own; and he refers, for the truth of what he affirms, to the example of the territorial paper-money of America; to that of Sweden, Ruffia, &c. &c. He imagines that thefe circumftances will have weight in the affembly; and that instead of a creation of affignats, equal in value to the whole national property, which he estimates at 2,000,000,000 of livres, only 800 millions will be iflued; which, added to the 400 millions already in circulation, will make the total of 1200 millions of livres. The affembly, he supposes, will be led to this measure, from two confiderations: ft, in order to promote the fale of the national property: 2dly, in hopes of re-establishing the finances and faving the ftate. He contends that both of thefe fuppofitions are unfounded; that the measure is unavailing as well as unjuft capable of producing all the mifchiefs to be feared; and infufficient to bring about the advantages which are expected. Such are the facts to be proved: the proofs are not altogether fo evident. He begins by aflerting that of the 1200 millions of affignats, not more than 600 millions will be actually employed in purchase of the national property: but his arguments in favour of this affertion do not convince us. He reafons first; that the fmall fums under 200 livres will remain in mercantile circulation: but will this be the cafe? It certainly will not, unless the affignats bear the value of fpecie: if they are at any discount, they will be collected by those who wish to purchase the national property; and even if they are at par, purchafers will rather pay with them, or in other words, the holders of them will rather exchange them for fpecie with the purchafers, than take the hazard of keeping in their hand a fictitious money; which, though at the time equally valuable with fpecie, may and probably muft, when thofe poffeffions which give it value are fold, fall confiderably under par. 2dly, It is urged, that as much of the affignat money as can be, will be paid for the taxes.-How far this will be the cafe, we know not. Suppofing it fo to happen, ftill the money will not be annihilated: it must exist somewhere: it will either be in the hands of government; or it will be again fent by them into circulation; if in their hands, it is just the fame as their poffeffing a part of the national property; if in circulation, it will be brought in exchange, where it can be employed to moft advantage; that is, in exchange for the national property; fince, as far as the fale of that is concerne, it is fpecie: it is gold there, however it may be droís every where elfe.-One question may perhaps be here worth confidering how will the aiguats, if they are received by government in payment of taxes, be received: as fpecie?-or according to their value in circulation, bearing a confiderable difcount? If as specie, will not government be lofers, fince they cannot again circulate them as fuch? If at a difcount, will it not be difcrediting their own notes? The third reason why the affignats will not be brought in exchange for the national property is, that a part will go to neceffitous creditors, who will not be in a fituation to purchase; but then thefe neceffitous creditors must pay away the affignats to their own preffing creditors, who either themselves will bring them to the beft market, (if they have held them long enough,) or who must have parted with them to others by whom they will be brought. So that on the whole there appears no ground for fuppofing that one half of the affignats will never be brought, in order to purchase the national property. The refult then, that the national property will not be bought,' as far as it refts on these foundations, is not to be admitted nor do we fee how it can be argued with any fuccefs, that the holders of the affignats will keep them in their poffeffion, rather than exchange them for the domains, &c. because they cannot have any confidence that thefe domains will form a conftant and unalienable property.-Certainly the lands are more fure property than the paper; and if, in the eyes of the nation, the poffeffion of the lands themfelves is of no value, what can be the value of bills, whofe whole worth is that they are exchangeable for thofe lands, which are worth nothing? M. DE CALONNE next proceeds to fhew that the creation of affignats, and the fale of the national property, will not reeftablish the finances, nor lighten the burthens of the people. After treating at large on what he terms the tyrannical and fcandalous defpoiling of the clergy, &c. he affirms, that this feizure of their property can be attended with no profit: that the ecclefiaftical revenues will not be fufficient to anfwer the ecclefiaftical expences; and, finally, that the poffeffion of the lands of the clergy will add to the expences of the nation 50 millions of livres per ann. befide the reimbursement of the debts of the clergy, amounting to the grofs fum of 150 millions! but how can all this be?If their poffeffions are taken from the clergy, and if their incomes are indecently' leffened, how happens it that thofe poffeffions which have hitherto fo well fubfifted them, fhould just now prove infufficient for their subfiftence? We are at a lofs to decide, unlefs it be because tythes We believe that a decifion has taken place on this fubje&t: but, being ignorant of the particulars, we ftate the question. are are abolished. Now, if this be the reafon, why then, as these tythes were gathered from the people, it is no hardship on the people, if, in confequence of their abolishment, they are required to pay a lefs fum, collected in a lefs tyrannical manner. Therefore this argument, and all the confequences depending on it, are nugatory. It is next argued, and, we must confefs, with great ingenuity, that the benefit arifing from the fale of the national property will be infignificant, nay, loft, when compared with the immenfity of the deficiency which it is to fupply. From the fale of thefe lands, will arife, fays the author, a certain fum of money, which, going to the difcharge of the debts, will leffen the annual expenditure by fo much as was the interest of that fum. All this cannot, however, be fet down as favings; becaufe, by the fale of the lands, the revenue arifing from them is loft it is only then the furplus, by which the annual intereft of the fum arifing from the fale, exceeds the former annual revenue collected from the lands, which can be reckoned as a faving to the ftate, or as leffening the deficiency. This furplus is eftimated at 40 millions per annum; and we are informed that the intereft which the firit affignats bore, (3 per cent.) amounting to 12 millions on the 400 millions of affignats, is not brought in deduction of thefe 40 millions: neither ought it to be, fince in one cafe the fum is only the interest of the capital faved; in the other, it is the capital itself. Yet this circumftance is gloffed over: it is pretended that the 12 millions are omitted, becaufe fome mistakes, on the other fide, may have crept into the calculation. There are fome other drawbacks, however, on this benefit of 40 millions, which M. DE CALONNE does ftate. The firft is, that when the affignats fhall be all reclaimed by the treasury in confequence of the fale of the lands, thefe being withdrawn. from circulation, the price of provifion must rife; confequently, the price of labour, and confequently, alfo, the expenditure of government:-but muft this confequence neceffarily enfue? According to a former argument of M. DE CALONNE, the prefence of the affignats rendered gold fcarce: their being withdrawn may then perhaps again make it plenty: but waving this, is a dearnefs of provifion a conftant and natural confe quence of a scarcity of money? If money be plenty, it may Very true: this revenue is loft: but it has never yet been stated as an increase of the income of government: it ought to have been fo ftated: fince the expences of the clergy are brought as an increase of government's expenditure.-We shall notice this fallacy hereafter, be |