depends less upon their revenues than upon their expences, as it is evident that no income can be sufficient, whilst the expenditure exceeds it.

The revenue of a state being drawn from that of the people, the greater the revenue of the people, or the greater the annual produce of their industry, the more they can afford to the support of government; it is therefore the interest of governments to increase as much as possible the produce of national industry, from which alone their revenues can be derived.

Taxes are said never to reduce, for a considerable time, the rate of profit upon the article taxed; but it may reduce the consumption of the article taxed, and therefore render it necessary to lay on an additional profit, in consequence of the falling off or lessening of the trade, which is generally done, and this falls upon the consumer; but if, in any way, it lessen or reduce the labour and industry of the country, it must be an evident evil to society, which ought to be avoided.

The droit reunée, and droit de tol of France, are impolitic and unjust taxes, although profitable ones. They were most probably taken from the idea of the Alcavala in Spain. The droit de tol is a duty on all the necessaries of life brought into towns; but on the outside of the barriers any one may drink wine, or have all the necessaries and luxuries of life, without paying this tax upon them. It therefore appears to be a tax upon all those who

choose to live in towns in preference to the country, and may so far be servicable, as it may increase the labour and industry of the country. The droit reunée is a tax upon the sale, or tranfer, of all articles or property by wholesale, however so often it may be transferred. If this tax existed in London, where middle dealers and jobbers sometimes transfer property and merchandize ten times a day, it would evidently soon amount to more than ten times the first cost of the goods. This tax was probably made to prevent such transactions, but it cannot safely be applied without injury to commerce and trade.

In countries where people pay taxes, and where they contribute largely to government, and where things are dear, they are said to be generally more happy and more prosperous than where things are cheap, and where the people pay no taxes, because necessity gives a spur to industry. People are always complaining of some evil or other, either real or imaginary; and perhaps no system, however good, would render all people happy and contented. There was, no doubt, as much complaint when the annual taxes of this country amounted to only ten millions, as now that they amount to fifty; but this arises from the relative means, for it is as easy to pay fifty millions as ten millions, if there are proportionate means to do it. Means often rise out of necessity, because it promotes energy; but there must be a limit to all things, and to all human effort,

beyond which it cannot proceed; for labour cannot exceed its strength and power, and although necessity may create invention, yet talent is not unbounded.

When the revolution began in France, in the year 1789, the net taxes, received into that treasury, amounted to about nineteen millions of pounds sterling, but the amount levied upon the people was said to be nearly thirty millions; the difference was occasioned by the expensive mode of collection, or the farming of the taxes, like our posthorse duties; the contractors, no doubt, taking care to have good profit, and probably had very large fees to pay out of it. These taxes, of thirty millions, were paid by a population of about twenty-five millions, who are now obliged to pay nearly double that amount.

In Great Britain, in the year 1775, ten millions sterling were said to be levied annually upon less than eight millions of people, without its being possible to say that any particular orders of people were oppressed. In 1805, the taxes of Great Britain, levied upon a population of about nine millions, amounted to above thirty-six millions, or four pounds per head. The taxes have since increased to more than double that amount, but are now reduced to about fifty-four millions, to be paid by eighteen millions of people, reckoning Great Britain and Ireland together. It therefore appears, that the people are much relieved in regard to taxation, and the revenue of the next year may probably in

crease, by trade and commerce, so as to exceed the expenditure; but it must not be forgotten that last year's expenditure exceeded the revenue by fourteen millions; a sum which, fifty years ago, was more than the whole annual amount of the revenue, or more than at that time could have been thought possible to raise..

If nine millions of people have paid thirty-six millions of taxes, or four pounds per head, could not seventy millions of people pay two hundred and eighty millions annually, if necessary? The population or subjects of Great Britain, taking in India and the colonies, amount to more than that number; and, if the taxes were fairly levied, it is evident that sufficient revenue might be raised, not only to meet the present expenditure, but to reduce the national debt, without the miserable resource of taking to the sinking fund to meet the present exigencies; and that the sum necessary to be raised would not be felt more than when ten millions were raised by eight millions of people. Of what use can colonies be to a state, unless they can contribute to its support, or at least to their own protection ? Must they not be an incumbrance, if they are to be supported by the parent state? It is like all nominal splendor, that would produce more good by its relinquishment than by its preservation; for that cannot be good which costs more in the procurement, or its maintenance, than it is worth in its enjoyment. When colonies are an expence, rather

than being productive to a parent state, it is better to sell them their freedom than to support them at a great expence. England gains more by America, at the present time, than she did when it was a subject country. A good alliance is better than a bad union, or more intimate connexion, to both the parent and the subject countries. If countries cannot be united in one common interest, they had better be separated as friends; but if colonies are properly united with the parent state, or like England and Ireland, for instance, they may be of benefit and support to each other, but never otherwise.

The possessions in India may be said to have become imperium magnum in imperio parvo; and the late Lord Clive declared, in the House of Commons, that he might have placed himself at the head of a greater empire than that of England. Is there then not room for something to be done, in this respect, to relieve the burdens of this country, and to make both countries more happy, and yet preserve the trade and render it more flourishing? Whilst the India Company were traders, and not princes, they were said to manage their trade successfully, and were able to pay from their profits a moderate dividend to the proprietors of their stock; since they have become sovereigns, with millions of revenue, they have been obliged to beg assistance from government, to keep them from bankruptcy.

The annual imports of the East India Company, previous to the year 1782, are said never to have