utional monarchy to complete the comparison。
United States Treasury Department Messenger 。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。 700 Clerk with lowest salary 。。。。。。。。。。。。。 1；000 Clerk with highest salary 。。。。。。。。。。。。 1；600 Chief Clerk 。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。 2；000 Secretary of State 。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。 6；000 The President 。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。 25；000
France Ministere des Finances Hussier 。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。 1；500 fr。 Clerk with lowest salary； 1；000 to 1；800 fr。 Clerk with highest salary 3；200 to 8；600 fr。 Secretaire…general 。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。20；000 fr。 The Minister 。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。80；000 fr。 The King 。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。12；000；000 fr。
I have perhaps done wrong in selecting France as my standard of comparison。 In France the democratic tendencies of the nation exercise an ever…increasing influence upon the Government； and the Chambers show a disposition to raise the low salaries and to lower the principal ones。 Thus； the Minister of Finance； who received 160；000 fr。 under the Empire； receives 80；000 fr。 in 1835： the Directeurs…generaux of Finance； who then received 50；000 fr。 now receive only 20；000 fr。 ＇This comparison is based on the state of things existing in France and the United States in 1831。 It has since materially altered in both countries； but not so much as to impugn the truth of the author's observation。＇＇
Under the rule of an aristocracy it frequently happens； on the contrary； that whilst the high officers are receiving munificent salaries； the inferior ones have not more than enough to procure the necessaries of life。 The reason of this fact is easily discoverable from causes very analogous to those to which I have just alluded。 If a democracy is unable to conceive the pleasures of the rich or to witness them without envy； an aristocracy is slow to understand； or； to speak more correctly； is unacquainted with； the privations of the poor。 The poor man is not （if we use the term aright） the fellow of the rich one； but he is a being of another species。 An aristocracy is therefore apt to care but little for the fate of its subordinate agents； and their salaries are only raised when they refuse to perform their service for too scanty a remuneration。
It is the parsimonious conduct of democracy towards its principal officers which has countenanced a supposition of far more economical propensities than any which it really possesses。 It is true that it scarcely allows the means of honorable subsistence to the individuals who conduct its affairs； but enormous sums are lavished to meet the exigencies or to facilitate the enjoyments of the people。 *j The money raised by taxation may be better employed； but it is not saved。 In general； democracy gives largely to the community； and very sparingly to those who govern it。 The reverse is the case in aristocratic countries； where the money of the State is expended to the profit of the persons who are at the head of affairs。
＇Footnote j： See the American budgets for the cost of indigent citizens and gratuitous instruction。 In 1831 250；000 were spent in the State of New York for the maintenance of the poor； and at least 1；000；000 were devoted to gratuitous instruction。 （William's 〃New York Annual Register；〃 1832； pp。 205 and 243。） The State of New York contained only 1；900；000 inhabitants in the year 1830； which is not more than double the amount of population in the Department du Nord in France。＇
Difficulty of Distinguishing The Causes Which Contribute To The Economy Of The American Government
We are liable to frequent errors in the research of those facts which exercise a serious influence upon the fate of mankind； since nothing is more difficult than to appreciate their real value。 One people is naturally inconsistent and enthusiastic； another is sober and calculating； and these characteristics originate in their physical constitution or in remote causes with which we are unacquainted。
These are nations which are fond of parade and the bustle of festivity； and which do not regret the costly gaieties of an hour。 Others； on the contrary； are attached to more retiring pleasures； and seem almost ashamed of appearing to be pleased。 In some countries the highest value is set upon the beauty of public edifices； in others the productions of art are treated with indifference； and everything which is unproductive is looked down upon with contempt。 In some renown； in others money； is the ruling passion。
Independently of the laws； all these causes concur to exercise a very powerful influence upon the conduct of the finances of the State。 If the Americans never spend the money of the people in galas； it is not only because the imposition of taxes is under the control of the people； but because the people takes no delight in public rejoicings。 If they repudiate all ornament from their architecture； and set no store on any but the more practical and homely advantages； it is not only because they live under democratic institutions； but because they are a commercial nation。 The habits of private life are continued in public； and we ought carefully to distinguish that economy which depends upon their institutions from that which is the natural result of their manners and customs。
Whether The Expenditure Of The United States Can Be Compared To That Of France
Two points to be established in order to estimate the extent of the public charges； viz。； the national wealth and the rate of taxation … The wealth and the charges of France not accurately known … Why the wealth and charges of the Union cannot be accurately known … Researches of the author with a view to discover the amount of taxation of Pennsylvania … General symptoms which may serve to indicate the amount of the public charges in a given nation … Result of this investigation for the Union。
Many attempts have recently been made in France to compare the public expenditure of that country with the expenditure of the United States； all these attempts have； however； been unattended by success； and a few words will suffice to show that they could not have had a satisfactory result。
In order to estimate the amount of the public charges of a people two preliminaries are indispensable： it is necessary； in the first place； to know the wealth of that people； and in the second； to learn what portion of that wealth is devoted to the expenditure of the State。 To show the amount of taxation without showing the resources which are destined to meet the demand； is to undertake a futile labor； for it is not the expenditure； but the relation of the expenditure to the revenue； which it is desirable to know。
The same rate of taxation which may easily be supported by a wealthy contributor will reduce a poor one to extreme misery。 The wealth of nations is composed of several distinct elements； of which population is the first； real property the second； and personal property the third。 The first of these three elements may be discovered without difficulty。 Amongst civilized nations it is easy to obtain an accurate census of the inhabitants； but the two others cannot be determined with so much facility。 It is difficult to take an exact account of all the lands in a country which are under cultivation； with their natural or their acquired value； and it is still more impossible to estimate the entire personal property which is at the disposal of a nation； and which eludes the strictest analysis by the diversity and the number of shapes under which it may occur。 And； indeed； we find that the most ancient civilized nations of Europe； including even those in which the administration is most central； have not succeeded； as yet； in determining the exact condition of their wealth。
In America the attempt has never been made； for how would such an investigation be possible in a country where society has not yet settled into habits of regularity and tranquillity； where the national Government is not assisted by a multiple of agents whose exertions it can command and direct to one sole end； and where statistics are not studied； because no one is able to collect the necessary documents； or to find time to peruse them？ Thus the primary elements of the calculations which have been made in France cannot be obtained in the Union； the relative wealth of the two countries is unknown； the property of the former is not accurately determined； and no means exist of computing that of the latter。
I consent； therefore； for the sake of the discussion； to abandon this necessary term of the comparison； and I confine myself to a computation of the actual amount of taxation； without investigating the relation which subsists between the taxation and the revenue。 But the reader will perceive that my task has not been facilitated by the limits which I here lay down for my researches。
It cannot be doubted that the central administration of France； assisted by all the public officers who are at its disposal； might determine with exactitude the amount of the direct and indirect taxes levied upon the citizens。 But this investigation； which no private individual can undertake； has not hitherto been completed by the French Government； or； at least； its results have not been made public。 We are acquainted