The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke Volume I Part 20

[47]

1754. _s. d._ Total export of British goods value, 8,317,506 15 3 Ditto of foreign goods in time 2,910,836 14 9 Ditto of ditto out of time 559,485 2 10 ------------------ Total exports of all kinds 11,787,828 12 10 Total imports 8,093,479 15 0 ------------------ Balance in favor of England 3,094,355 17 10 ------------------

1761. _s. d._ Total export of British goods 10,649,581 12 6 Ditto of foreign goods in time 3,553,692 7 1 Ditto of ditto out of time 355,015 0 2 ------------------ Total exports of all kinds 14,558,288 19 9 Total imports 9,294,915 1 6 ------------------ Balance in favor of England 5,263,373 18 3 ------------------

Here is the state of our trade in 1761, compared with a very good year of profound peace: both are taken from the authentic entries at the custom-house. How the author can contrive to make this increase of the export of English produce agree with his account of the dreadful want of hands in England, page 9, unless he supposes manufactures to be made without hands, I really do not see. It is painful to be so frequently obliged to set this author right in matters of fact. This state will fully refute all that he has said or insinuated upon the difficulties and decay of our trade, pages 6, 7, and 9.

[48] Page 7. See also page 13.

[49] Pages 12, 13.

[50] Page 17.

[51] Page 6.

[52] "Our merchants suffered by the detention of the galleons, as their correspondents in Spain were disabled from paying them for their goods sent to America."--State of the Nation, p. 7.

[53] Pages 12, 13.

[54] Page 6.

[55] Something however has transpired in the quarrels among those concerned in that transaction. It seems the _good Genius_ of Britain, so much vaunted by our author, did his duty n.o.bly. Whilst we were gaining such advantages, the court of France was astonished at our concessions.

"J'ai apporte a Versailles, il est vrai, les Ratifications du Roi d'Angleterre, _a vostre grand etonnement, et a celui de bien d'autres_.

Je dois cela au bontes du Roi d'Angleterre, a celles de Milord Bute, a Mons. le Comte de Viry, a Mons. le Duc de Nivernois, et en fin a mon scavoir faire."--Lettres, &c., du Chev. D'Eon, p. 51.

[56] "The navy bills are not due till six months after they have been issued; six months also of the seamen'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 a.s.signees nor representatives. The precise amount of such sums cannot be ascertained; but they can hardly be 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_l._ 18_s._ 11-3/4_d._ consisting chiefly of articles which could not then be discharged; such articles will be larger now, in proportion to the increase of the establishment; and an 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 princ.i.p.al 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 quant.i.ty of them is large, they are a heavy inc.u.mbrance upon all money transactions"

[57]

Navy 1,450,900 Army 1,268,500 Ordnance 174,600 The four American governments 19,200 General surveys in America 1,600 Foundling Hospital 38,000 To the African committee 13,000 For the civil establishment on the coast of Africa 5,500 Militia 100,000 Deficiency of land and malt 300,000 Deficiency of funds 202,400 Extraordinaries of the army and navy 35,000 ---------- Total 3,609,700

[58] 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 640,000_l._ instead of 560,000_l._; the remaining term is worth, ten years and a quarter instead of eleven years;[59] its value is 820,000_l._ instead of 880,000_l._; and the whole value of that premium is 1,460,000_l._ instead of 1,440,000_l._ 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 deliberation. Thus the premiums in 1759 are cast up 90,000_l._ 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 Parliament." He does not take notice that the first are irredeemable till February, 1771, the other till July, 1782. In this the amount of the premiums is computed on the time which they have run. Weakly and ignorantly; for he might have added to this, and strengthened his argument, 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, he has added to the premiums of 15 per cent in 1759, and three per cent in 1760, the annuity paid for them since their commencement; the fallacy of which is manifest; for the premiums in these cases can he neither more nor less than the additional capital for which the public 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 200_l._ because he happens to have paid twenty years' interest on a loan of 100_l._

[59] See Smart and Demoivre.

[60] Pages 30-32.

[61] In a course of years a few manufacturers have been tempted abroad, not by cheap living, but by immense premiums, to 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.

[62] Although the public brewery has considerably increased in this latter period, the produce of the malt-tax has been something less than in the former; this cannot be attributed to the new malt-tax. Had this been the cause of the lessened consumption, the public brewery, so much more burdened, must have felt it more. The cause of this diminution of the malt-tax I take to have been princ.i.p.ally owing to the greater dearness of corn in the second period than in the first, which, in all its consequences, affected the people in the country much more than those in the towns. But the revenue from consumption was not, on the whole, impaired; as we have seen in the foregoing page.

[63]

Total Imports, value, Exports, ditto.

1752 7,889,369 11,694,912 1753 8,625,029 12,243,604 1754 8,093,472 11,787,828 --------- ---------- Total 24,607,870 35,726,344 24,607,870 ---------- Exports exceed imports 11,118,474 ---------- Medium balance 3,706,158 ----------

Total Imports, value, Exports, ditto.

1764 10,818,946 16,104,532 1765 10,889,742 14,550,507 1766 11,475,825 14,024,964 ----------- ----------- Total 32,685,513 44,740,003 ----------- 32,683,613 ----------- Exports exceed 12,054,490 ----------- Medium balance for three last years 4,018,163

[64] It is dearer in some places, and rather cheaper in others; but it must soon all come to a level.

[65] A tax rated by the intendant in each generality, on the presumed fortune of every person below the degree of a gentleman.

[66] Before the war it was sold to, or rather forced on, the consumer at 11 sous, or about 5_d._ the pound. What it is at present, I am not informed. Even this will appear no trivial imposition. In London, salt may be had at a penny farthing per pound from the last retailer.

[67] Page 31.

[68] Page 33.

[69] Page 33.

[70] Page 33.

[71] The figures in the "Considerations" are wrongly cast up; it should be 3,608,700_l._

[72] "Considerations," p. 43. "State of the Nation," p. 33.

[73] Ibid.

[74] Page 34.

[75] The author of the "State of the Nation," p. 34, informs us, that the sum of 75,000_l._ allowed by him for the extras of the army and ordnance, is far less than was allowed for the same service in the years 1767 and 1768. It is so undoubtedly, and by at least 200,000_l._ He sees that he cannot abide by the plan of the "Considerations" in this point, nor is he willing wholly to give it up. Such an enormous difference as that between 35,000_l._ and 300,000_l._ puts him to a stand. Should he adopt the latter plan of increased expense, he must then confess that he had, on a former occasion, egregiously trifled with the public; at the same time all his future promises of reduction must fall to the ground.

If he stuck to the 35,000_l._ he was sure that every one must expect from him some account how this monstrous charge came to continue ever since the war, when it was clearly unnecessary; how all those successions of ministers (his own included) came to pay it, and why his great friend in Parliament, and his partisans without doors, came not to pursue to ruin, at least to utter shame, the authors of so groundless and scandalous a profusion. In this strait he took a middle way; and, to come nearer the real state of the service, he outbid the "Considerations," at one stroke, 40,000_l._; at the same time he hints to you, that you may _expect_ some benefit also from the original plan.

But the author of the "Considerations" will not suffer him to escape it.

He has pinned him down to his 35,000_l._; for that is the sum he has chosen, not as what he thinks will probably be required, but as making the most ample allowance for every possible contingency. See that author, p. 42 and 43.

[76] He has done great injustice to the establishment of 1768; but I have not here time for this discussion; nor is it necessary to this argument.

[77] Page 34.

[78] In making up this account, he falls into a surprising error of arithmetic. "The deficiency of the land-tax in the year 1754 and 1755,[80] when it was at 2_s._, amounted to no more, on a medium, than 49,372_l._; to which, if we add _half the sum_, it will give us 79,058_l._ as the peace deficiency at 3_s._"

Total 49,372 Add the half 24,686 ------- 74,058

Which he makes 79,058_l._ This is indeed in disfavor of his argument; but we shall see that he has ways, by other errors, of reimbursing himself.

[79] Page 34.

[80] Page 33.

[81] Page 43.

[82] Page 35.

[83] Page 37.

[84] Pages 37, 38.

[85] Pages 39, 40.