An Inquiry into the Permanent Causes of the Decline and Fall of Powerful and Wealthy Nations Part 41

[end of page #256]

CHAP. VI.

_Causes of Decline, peculiar to England_.

In addition to the causes of decline which Britain, as a wealthy country, has, in common with most other nations, it has some peculiar to itself, (or of which the degree at least is peculiar to it).

The national debt, the high rate of taxation, the prodigious expense of the poor, and the nature of the government, are peculiar to this country. There are other circ.u.mstances in its favour, of which we shall speak in the next chapter; but, in this, we shall review those that are against it, and of an unfavourable nature and operation.

The high rate of taxation, for the very reason that it is the highest ever known, inspires our enemies with hopes of our downfall, and makes them persevere in continuing to put us to expense.

The unprecedented commerce we enjoy, of which every other nation would wish to have a share, (and of which each, most mistakenly, thinks it would have a share, if Britain was undone,) is a cause of attracting envy and enmity, and repelling friends.h.i.+p. Our colonies in the West, and our possessions in the East, act like the conductors that draw the electric fluid to a building, but they do not, like those conductors, serve to protect it from violence. We have seen, that the advantage arising from them is more than doubtful, that they enrich individuals and impoverish the state; but all this would be nothing new, were it not for the vast scale on which those evils exist.

The poor's rate, which is in itself completely unexampled, though a common thing to all nations, is so exorbitant in England, that it may very properly be ranked amongst the dangers peculiar to this country.

Who would believe, that Frederick the Great of Prussia carried on his brilliant and successful wars against the most formidable enemies, expended more than one-eighth of his revenues annually on the encouragement of industry, and left his treasury well stored, yet all this with an income, less by one-fourth than the sums that go to support [end of page #257] the poor in England, notwithstanding all the miserable manoeuvres that are practiced =sic= to avoid giving them a.s.sistance?

The form of government in England, though best for the liberty of the subject, and for the security of persons and property, is deficient in the means of repressing those infringements which particular bodies of people make upon the community at large. The representative system, when well understood, divides itself into parties, having different interests. There are the commercial, the landed, the East India, the West India, and the law, all of which have great parliamentary influence, and can be formidable to any minister; they therefore have a means of defending their interests, and they are concerned so deeply as to take a very active part whenever any questions are agitated relative to them.

The landed interest and the law are, indeed, the only ones that have any great party in the House of Peers; but then the House of Peers seldom interferes in matters that concern the interests of the others.

The Lords seem not to think it their province; and, in general, more through diffidence than negligence, they avoid meddling, though, to do that honourable house justice, to it we owe much. Many bills, of a dangerous tendency, have been thrown out by it, after they had pa.s.sed the other house; and it has been generally done with a wisdom, magnanimity, and moderation, which is only to be accounted for by a true love of the country and an upright intention. {201}

{201} It is wonderful to what a length good intention, (zeal apart,) will go in leading men right, even when they have not paid very particular attention to a subject. There is a feeling of what is wise, as well as of what is right, that partakes a little of instinct, perhaps, but is more unerring than far fetched theory on many occasions. This was seen in a most exemplary manner, at the time that the principles of the French revolution were most approved of here. Those principles were plausible, though flimsy, and founded on sophisms, and a species of reasoning, that plain unlettered men could not answer, and men who did give themselves the pains to reason might have answered; yet, three times in four, it was the man who could not answer it, who, guided by upright intentions, rejected it as bad, without being able to tell why. The most acute were, in this case, the most deceived; for it must now be allowed, that all approbation of the theories, relative to the rights of man, and the manner of a.s.serting them were wrong.

Many of those who fell into the error had, no doubt, unblameable intentions, but they did not consult common sense.

[end of page #258]

In every a.s.sembly, a small number, who completely understand their own interest, can do a great deal, if they will act together; but, this is not all, they can use arguments with a minister that pave the way for obtaining the ends they have in view, while the general interests of the country alarm no one but upon great occasions.

Under arbitrary monarchs, all bodies with separate interests, are kept in due order, they have no means of defending themselves but by remonstrance, which, against power, is but a very inadequate protection.

There is nothing forced or chimerical in this statement of the case, and the consequence is, that no country ever saw any bodies rise to such a height, except the clergy in Roman Catholic countries, and the barons during the feudal system, when they had arms in their hands; who, if they could not absolutely resist their sovereign, were at least able to refuse him aid, and could annoy him greatly. But those examples will bear no comparison with the separate interests in England at this time.

The barons have long lost their power, and the Roman Catholic clergy have lost the greatest part of their power and revenue also. If they had not, wealthy and powerful kingdoms would not have existed.

Under a free government, where people think that an opposition to a minister in parliament is a most excellent thing, the energies of the nation, as to war, are greatly lessened. This must, in its connections with other nations, produce very hurtful effects; but, where the evil is without a remedy, there is no advantage in dwelling upon it; and it does not appear that there is any possibility of separating from a free government, some sort of an opposing power, that must hamper the executive, and lessen the energies of the nation.

Under pure monarchies, kings can reward merit; they can encourage talents, and act according to circ.u.mstances. In England, the king, or his ministers, have no fund from which they can do this. An application to parliament is expensive and troublesome; and, in many cases, where the object would be fair, it would be unattainable. But this is not all, for when, by act of parliament, any thing of the sort is [end of page #259] once done, it is left without proper controul, and the expense is generally double what it ought to be.

On the whole, there is too little of discretional =sic= power in a representative government; good cannot be done but by rules, which, in many cases, it is impossible to comply with. This is a disadvantage which we labour under, and is a sort of drawback on our excellent form of government; but this is not like the opposition in the senate, it may be got over, and merits attention.

Such appear to be the disadvantages to which Britain is peculiarly liable, either in toto, or in the degree; but, on the other hand, she has many circ.u.mstances in her favour, if they are properly taken hold of; and, indeed, some, of which the effect will be favourable, whether any particular attention is paid to them or not. To those we shall advert with peculiar pleasure, and hope that they will not be neglected, but that they may afford a means of continuing our career of prosperity on the increasing scale, or that, at least, they may prevent us from sharing the fate of those nations that have gone before.

[end of page #260]

CHAP. VII.

_Circ.u.mstances peculiar to England, and favourable to it_.

It has been observed, that, in northern nations, where luxury is not attended with such a degree of sloth and effeminacy as in warm climates, the habits of industry can never so completely leave a country. The feelings of cold and a keen appet.i.te are enemies to sloth and laziness; indeed they are totally incompatible with those habits and that degradation of character, that are to be found in southern climates. This advantage Britain shares with other nations of the north; but she has some peculiar to herself.

Situated in an island, the people have a character peculiar to themselves, that prevents foreigners and foreign influence from producing those baneful effects that are so evident in many nations, where they come and depart with more facility, and where a greater similarity in manners and in character enable them to act a conspicuous and a very dangerous part, in the cases of misunderstanding and party dispute.

In all the wars, b.l.o.o.d.y and long-contested as they were, between the houses of York and Lancaster, foreign influence never produced any effect such as that of Spain did in France, previous to the accession of Henry IV. or as the influence of France and Spain have produced in Italy, or that of France on Spain itself, or those of Russia and Prussia in Poland, with numerous other examples on the continent.

We know of no ideal boundaries in this country. In this country we are all one people, and can distinguish ourselves from any other; indeed, the national character is rather too averse to mixing with people from the continent; but this, that seems now a fault, may some day be considered as a very useful virtue.

Even in the times when an unfortunate jealousy and mistaken interest kept England and Scotland at variance, and when the latter kingdom was in the habit of adopting the politics of France, and [end of page #261] embracing its interests, there seems to have been some repelling principle that kept the little nation out of the gripe of the great one.

The French never had any preponderating power there, and, indeed, in latter times so little, as not to be able to defend Queen Mary or the Romish religion against the reformers; to do both of which there was no want of inclination. It appears, then, very clearly, that though, on the best terms of friends.h.i.+p, the Scotch had at the bottom that British mistrust of foreigners, that, ever since it was civilized, has freed the island from foreign influence.

The form of government, the security of property, and the free scope that is given to exertion in every line of business, will continue to enable this country to hold itself high, even if some of its present sources of wealth should be dried up; and, whatever may be the feelings of the representatives of the people upon ordinary occasions, the moment that any real danger occurs, they will, we are certain, act like men, determined to stand by their country.

How feeble was the former French government when a.s.sailed with difficulty? It was at once as if struck motionless, or, the little animation that was left was just sufficient to enable it to go from one blunder to another. How different has England been on every emergency? In place of the arm of government seeming to slacken in the day of danger, it has risen superior to it. We have never seen the same scenes happen here, that have taken place in Poland, Sweden, and so many other places. In the three attempts to invasion, {202} (Monmouth's and the two other rebellions,) where foreign influence was used, the event was the most fatal possible to those who made them; they were contemptible in the extreme; and, if it is considered in whose favour they were, it is probable the support from a foreign power rather did injury to the cause.

{202} Here we must not confound the case of the Stuarts with that of the King of France. In England, it was the government that was divided, the legislative being against the executive; _one_ part of the government was feeble, but the other was not, and therefore we cannot say that the government was feeble. In France, the king and ministers governed alone, they were the whole government, and therefore as they were feeble, the government may be taxed with weakness.

[end of page #262]

The form of government has this great advantage in it, that, as abilities are the way to preferment, the higher cla.s.ses (at least) have a better education than the same rank of persons in any other nation, so far as regards the interest of the public, and the nature of the connection between the different orders of society; ignorance of which, is the surest way to be destroyed.

In all new and rising states the higher orders, even under despotic governments, and where all the distinctions of ranks are completely established, have a proper regard for the importance and welfare of the lower orders of people. As they increase in wealth and have lost sight of its origin, which is industry, they change their mode of thinking; and, by degrees, the lower cla.s.ses are considered as only made for the convenience of the rich. The degradation into which the lower orders themselves fall, by vice and indolence, widens the difference and increases the contempt in which they are held. This is one of the invariable marks of the decline of nations; but the nature of the English government prevents that, by keeping up a connection and mutual dependence amongst the poor and the rich, which is not found either under absolute monarchies or in republics. In republics, the people become factious and idle, when they become any way wealthy.

In this country, besides the insular situation, circ.u.mstances in general are such as to prevent the lower cla.s.ses from falling into that sort of idleness, apathy, and contempt, that they do in other countries, even supposing these burthens were done away, that at present necessitate exertion.

To those causes let another still be added, the religious wors.h.i.+p of the country, which, without any dispute or question, is greatly in its favour.

To speak nothing of the religious opinions or modes of wors.h.i.+p in ancient times, there are three at present that merit attention and admit of comparison.

The Christian religion is distinguished for raising men in character, and the Mahomedan for sinking them low. Whenever the Mahomedan faith has extended, the people are degraded in their manners, and the governments despotic. The disposition of a Mahomedan king [end of page #263] or emperor is more different in its nature, from that of a Christian sovereign, than the form of a hat is from that of a turban.

Under the most despotic Christian sovereigns, matters are governed by law, there are no regular murders committed by the hand of power, without the intervention of justice; and if plenitude of power admits of the greatest excesses in the sovereign, in some Christian countries, the opinion of his fellow men, the fear of his G.o.d, or some sentiment or principle in his own breast, restrains him in the exercise of it.

It is not so with Mahomedan princes: with them, nothing is sacred that they hate, nothing shameful that they do. Whatever their conscience may be, whatever may be the nature of their moral rules, rapine and murder are certainly not forbidden by them, or the law is not obeyed.

In proportion to the despotism and ferocity of the sovereign, is the slavishness of the people, their brutality, and vice, in all Mahomedan countries; their character and its great inferiority is so well known, that it is impossible for any person to be ignorant of it.

When the Mahomedan governments possess power, they are proud and overbearing; the people luxurious, and given to every refinement in vice. When they sink, that pride becomes ferocity, and the luxury degenerates into brutality and sloth; but neither in the one nor in the other case have they the proper value for science, for literature, for liberty, or for any of the acquirements that either make a man estimable or useful. They neither excel in arts, nor in science; phisically =sic=, they are inferior in utility, and their minds are less instructed. They are not equal to Christians either in war or in peace, nor to be compared to them for any one good quality.

The greatest and the best portion of the old world is, however, in their hands; but, in point of wealth or power, they are of little importance, and every day they are sinking lower still.