expenditure, which is but rarely the case, they furnish part of the natioal revenue, and must by no means be classed among the items of national charge. Of the Charge of Civil and Judicial Administration. The charge of civil and judicial administration is made up, partly of the specific allowances of magistrates and other officers, and partly of such degree of pomp and parade, as may be deemed necessary in the execution of their duties. Even if the burthen of that pomp and parade be thrown wholly or partially upon the public functionary, it must ultimately fall upon the shoulders of the public, for the salary of the functionary must be raised, in proportion to the appearance he is expected to make. This observation applies to every description of functionary, from the prince to the constable inclusive; consequently, a nation, which reverences its prince only when surrounded with the externals of greatness, with guards, horse and foot, laced liveries, and such costly trappings of royalty, must pay dearly for its taste. If, on the contrary, it can be content to respect simplicity rather than pageantry, and obey the laws, though unaided by the attributes of pomp and ceremony, it will save in proportion. This is what made the charges of government so light in many of the Swiss cantons, before the revolution, and in the North American colonies before their emancipation. It is well known, that those colonies, though under the dominion of England, had separate governments, of which they respectively defrayed the charge; yet the whole annual expenditure all together amounted to no more than 64,7007. sterling. 'An ever memorable example,' observes Smith, at how small an expense three millions of people may not only be governed, but well governed.** * It should be recollected, however, that they were at no charge of defence from external attack, except in respect to the savage tribes of the interior. From the official account of the receipts and disbursements of the United States, in the year 1806, presented by Mr. Gallatin, then Secretary of the Treasury, it appears that the total expenditure fell short of 12 millions of dollars, of which eight millions went to pay the interest of the public debt; leaving a sum of 4 millions only (i. e. somewhat more than 21 millions of francs,) for the charge of government, that is to say, the civil, judicial, military, and other public functions of a population of 12 millions: which is wholly defrayed by taxes on imports. (a) (a) This account is exclusive of the local disbursements of the different States. The population of the Union, 1806, was never estimated higher than 8 millions. The public debt and charges have both advanced very rapidly since that period, principally in consequence of the second war with Great Britain. The accounts for the year 1820 show a receipt of 22,326,244 dollars, inclusive of loans and balance of preceding year; and an expenditure of 25,064,413 dollars, inclusive of interest on the public debt; exhibiting a Causes entirely of a political nature as well as the form of government which they help to determine, have an influence in apportioning the salaries of public officers, civil and judicial, the deficit of $2,638,169. The estimates for 1821, show a receipt of 16,550,000 dollars, and an expenditure of 21,163,417 dollars, exhibiting a deficit, inclusive of that of 1820, of no less than 7,451,595 dollars, which has been reduced by retrenchments to 4,658,483 dollars: to meet this, a loan has been again proposed, as the only alternative of a return to internal taxation. If America should persist in her views of naval aggrandizement, and in her absurd imitation of the errors of the English prohibitive system, and, above all, in her attempt to return to a metallic money, she will probably soon find her finances still less flourishing than at present. (1) T. (1) POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES, States & Territories. STATES. 1. Maine, 2. New Hampshire, According to five official enumerations. 1stCensus 2dCensus 3d Census 4th Census 5th Census P.Ct. Pop. 1790. Pop.1800. Pop.1810. Pop. 1820. Pop. 1830 10yrs 399,462 33,9 96,540 151,719 228,705 298,335 141,885 183,858 214,460| 244,161 269,533 10,4 3. Vermont, 4. Massachusetts, 280,679 19,0 523,287 610,014 16,6 5. Rhode Island, 9. Pennsylvania, 10. Delaware, 434,373 11. Maryland, - 15. Georgia, 72,674 72,749 76,931 83,059 97,210 17,0 297,711 8,2 1,913,508 | 33,4 320,779 15,6 1,347,672 | 28,4 76,739 5,5 446,913 9,7 1,211,272 13,7 638,829 738,470 15,6 581,458 15,7 516,567 51,5 16. Alabama, 17. Mississippi, 18. Louisiana, 308,997 141,6 75,448 136,806 80,1 215,575 40,7 19. Tennessee, 105,602 261,727 420,813 684,822 62,7 charge of public display, and those likewise of public institutions and establishments. Thus, in a despotic government, where the subject holds his property at the will of the sovereign, who fixes himself the charge of his household, that is to say, the amount of the public money which he chooses to spend on his personal necessities and pleasures and the keeping up of the royal establishment, that charge will probably be fixed at a higher rate, than where it is arranged and contested between the representatives of the prince and of the tax-payers respectively. The salaries of inferior public officers in like manner depend, partly upon their individual importance, and partly upon the general plan of government. Their services are dear or cheap to the public, not merely in proportion to what they actually cost, but likewise in proportion as they are well or ill executed. A duty ill performed is dearly bought, however little be paid for it; it is dear too, if it be superfluous, or unnecessary; resembling in this respect an article of furniture, that, if it do not answer its purpose, or be not wanted, is merely useless lumber. Of this description, under the old regime of France, were the officers of high-admiral, highsteward of the household, the king's cup-bearer, the master of his hounds, and a variety of others, which added nothing even to the splendour of royalty, and were merely so many means of dispensing personal favour and emolument. For the same reason, whenever the officers of government are needlessly multiplied, the people are saddled with charges, which are not necessary to the maintenance of public order. It is only giving an unnecessary form to that benefit, or product, which is not at all the better of it, if indeed it be not worse.* A bad government, that can not support its violence, injustice, and exaction, without a multitude of mercenaries, satellites, and spies, and gaols innumerable, makes its subjects pay for its prisons, spies, and soldiers, which nowise contribute to the public happi ness. On the other hand, a public duty may be cheap, although very liberally paid. A low salary is wholly thrown away upon an incapable and inefficient officer; his ignorance will probably cost the public ten times the amount of his salary; but the knowledge and activity of a man of ability are fully equivalent to the pay he receives; the losses he saves to the public, and the benefits derived from his exertions, greatly outweigh his personal emolument, even if settled on the most liberal scale. There is real economy in procuring the best of every thing, even at a larger price. Merit can seldom be engaged at a low An example occurs to me of a city of France, whose municipal administration was both mildly and efficiently conducted before 1789, at a charge of 1000 crowns per annum only, but under the Imperial government, though it cost 30,000 fr., afforded no security against the caprice and arbitrary will of the sovereign. rate, because it is applicable to more occupations than one. The talent, that makes an able minister, would, in another profession, make a good advocate, physician, farmer, or merchant; and merit will find both employment and emolument in all these departments. If the public service offer no adequate reward for its exertion, it will choose some other more promising occupation. Integrity is like talent; it can not be had without paying for it, which is not at all wonderful; for the honest man can not resort to those discreditable shifts and contrivances, which dishonesty looks to as a supplemental resource. The power, which commonly accompanies the exercise of public functions, is a kind of salary, that often far exceeds the pecuniary emolument attached to them. It is true, that in a well ordered state, where law is supreme, and little is left to the arbitrary control of the ruler, there is little opportunity of indulging the caprice and love of domination implanted in the human breast. Yet the discretion, which the law must inevitably vest in those who are to enforce it, and particularly in the ministerial department, together with the honour commonly attendant on the higher offices of the state, have a real value, which makes them eagerly sought for, even in countries where they are by no means lucrative. The rules of strict economy would probably make it advisable to abridge all pecuniary allowance, wherever there are other sufficient attractions to excite a competition for office, and to confer it on none but the wealthy, were there not a risk of losing, by the incapacity of the officer, more than would be gained by the abridgment of his salary. This, as Plato well observes in his Republic, would be like entrusting the helm to the richest man on board. Besides, there is some danger, that a man, who gives his services for nothing, will make his authority a matter of gain, however rich he may be. The wealth of a public functionary is no security against his venality: for ample fortune is commonly accompanied with desires as ample, and probably even more ample, especially if he have to keep up an appearance, both as a man of wealth and a magistrate. Moreover, supposing what is not altogether impossible, namely, that one can meet with wealth united with probity, and with, besides, the activity requisite to the due performance of public duty, is it wise to run the risk of adding the preponderance of authority to that of wealth, which is already but too manifest? With what grace could his employers call to account an agent, who could assume the merit of generosity, both with the people and with the government? There are, however, some ways, in which the gratuitous services of the rich may be employed with advantage; particularly in those departments, that confer more honour than power: as in the administration of institutions of public charity, or of public correction or punishment. In France under the old regime, the government, when harrassed with the want of money, was in the habit of putting up its of fices to sale. This is the very worst of all expedients; it introduces all the mischiefs of gratuitous service; for the emolument is then no more, than the interest of the capital expended in the purchase of the office; and has the additional evil of costing to the state as much as if the service were not gratuitously performed; for the public remains charged with the interest of a capital, that has been consumed and lost. It has been sometimes the practice to consign certain civil functions, such as the registry of births, marriages, and deaths, to the ecclesiastical body, whose emoluments, arising from their clerical duties, may be supposed to enable them to execute these without pay. But there is always danger in confiding the execution of civil duties to a class of men, that pretend to a commission from a still higher than a national authority.* In spite of every precaution, the public or the monarch will never be served so well or so cheaply as individuals. Inferior public agents can not be so narrowly watched by their superiors, as private ones; nor have the superiors themselves an equal interest in vigilant superintendence. Besides, it is easy enough for underlings to impose on a superior, who has many to look after, is perhaps placed at a distance, and can give but little attention to each individually; and whose vanity makes him more alive to the officious zeal of his inferior, than to the real service and utility, that the public good requires. As to the monarch and the nation, who are the parties most interested in good public administration, because it consolidates the power of the one and enlarges the hap piness of the other, it is next to impossible for them to exert a perpetual and effectual control. In most cases, this duty must of necessity devolve on agents, who will deceive them when it is their interest to do so, as is proved by abundance of examples. "Public services," says Smith, are never better performed than when their reward comes only in consequence of their being performed, and is proportioned to the diligence employed in per * Several times during the last century the Molinist priesthood refused to execute their clerical duties in favour of the Jansenists, in spite of all the government could do; on the pretence, that it was better to obey the divine command as conveyed by the voice of the Pope, than that of any human authority. (a) (a) This inconvenience can arise only in countries, where there is an exclusive national church, subjected, in matters of doctrine and discipline, to an independent or external superior: as in countries embracing the faith of Rome. But there is another inconvenience, that has been much dwelt upon by an eminent divine of the Scottish church; viz. the inconvenience of direct. ing the attention of the priesthood from its clerical to civil functions, and, by a confusion of such different duties, abridging the benefit of division of labour. T. |