of this revenue were, Firft, PROPERTY VESTED IN THE SOVEREIGN, as the feignior of all the lands in his kingdom'; comprehending, crown lands, forefts, mines. Secondly, LUCRATIVE PREROGATIVES Comprehending efcuage or money in lieu of military fervices, quit rents, aids, relief, wardship, marriage, fine of alienation, efcheat.

But thefe were not the only advantages attending the right of feigniory; for, as, lord paramount of the kingdom, the fovereign claimed all bona vacantia, or goods to the property of which no other perfon had any legal pretenfion, Upon this principle chiefly, the King of England was intitled, to all treafures of money, gold, filver, plate or bullion found hidden in the earth, to waifs or goods ftolen or thrown away by the thief in his flight for fear of being apprehended, provided the party injured did not exert himself in the purfuit or conviction of the offender; to eftrays, royal fith, goods wrecked, cuftody of idiots, goods uninherited; to prerogatives military, judicial, political, inquifitorial, commercial and ecclefiaftical.

Another fource of the ancient revenue of the Crown of England, was, voluntary contributions; a fyftem of revenue which, though, when abufed it has given birth to much difcontent, and indeed has occafioned many revolutions, yet has hardly ever been accompanied either with much difguft or with great oppreffion, when this rule has been invariably adhered to, 146 never to exact from any individual a fum of money, which, confiftently with his circumftances and the fituation of the public, he ought not, on every principle of juftice SPONTANEOUSLY to have given.'

Another fource of revenue to the crown was TAXES; including taxes in kind, perfonal taxes, taxes on the Jews, hearth-money, land-tax, taxes on perfonal property, fubfidies, customs, and excife. To thefe fources of revenue to the crown in ancient times our author adds regal exactions. Such were the burdens to which the inhabitants of England were formerly fubject. It is certain, that they did not exist at once; and that fometimes one mode of exaction prevailed, which, in process of time, was abandoned in favour of another. But, whatever the laudatores temporis acti may say, it must be evident to every impartial perfon, that our ancestors had great reafon to be diffatisfied with their political fituation, even in the article of taxation; and perhaps the prefent era, is, in that, as well as in many other refpects, as defirable a period to live in, as any that can be pointed out in the hiftory of this country; our additional weight of taxes being fully compenfated, by a more extended commerce, by improvements in every branch of fcience and of art, and by great acceffions to our wealth, our fecurity, and our freedom."

Our

.

Our author proceeds next more particularly to inquire into the revenue of England under the government of the Norman line, who compleatly established the feudal fyftem; and also its revenue during the Saxon line, or houfe of Plantagenet.

It appears from our author's obfervations, what little progrefs had been made in the knowledge of finance, from the Norman invafion to the death of Stephen. During the whole period, it was understood, that the king fhould live upon his own domains, and the profits of the feudal prerogatives; and every fpecies of taxation (military fervices only excepted) was the object of averfion and difguft. Danegeld, the only regular tax that exifted at the time, though perhaps neceffary for the protection of the commerce of the nation, was confidered as fo peculiarly fevere, that every monarch who attempted to levy it, was accounted a tyrant and an oppreffor, and that fingle tax occafioned as many complaints, and as great an out cry, as the whole load of multifarious impofts, to which this country is at prefent fubject.'

Under the government of the Saxon line, or houfe of Plantagenet, no inconfiderable progrefs was made in the knowledge of finance. The neceflity of converting military fervices into pecuniary aids was discovered. Taxes began to be laid upon perfonal as well as real property. The customs came to be accounted a con fiderable and important branch of the revenue, and the clergy were compelled to furnish contributions for the public fervice; nor was the fanction of the pope any longer accounted, neceffary for that purpose. New modes of taxation alfo were attempted; and though Tome of them were ill contrived and unproductive, yet it proves the ftrong anxiety of thofe who were entrusted with the government of the country to provide an effective revenue, adequate to the fupport of that high and diftinguished rank, which England was entitled to hold among the kingdoms of Europe.'

Our author having taken a view of the revenue of England under the government of the Houses of Lancafter and York, concludes with an obfervation of Mr. Hume's, "That during the courfe of the contest between the two "Rival Houfes, not an inftance can be produced of any

tax being impofed without the fanction of Parliament." After furveying the different modes adopted under the government of the House of Tudor, for raifing a revenue, Mr. Sinclair fays,

During this era, fome progrefs was made in finance; the advantages of public credit, and of a ftrict adherence to public faith, were discovered by the politic and fagacious minifters of Elizabeth; and the customs, and other branches of the revenue, were rendered more productive. But this period is particularly remarkable, for Jaying the true foundation of the poverty of the crown, and of the confequent power and importance of the commons. When the Emperor Charles V. was told, that Henry had fuppreffed the momafteries, he judiciously remarked, that the King of England had

killed the hen that laid him the golden eggs. In fact, the opulence of the church was always a fure refource for the crown to look up to. The clergy could hardly evade any burden the king thought proper to impofe. When, in addition therefore to the royal domains, the property of the church was fquandered, the fovereign had nothing to depend upon, but the affiftance of the nation at large, through the medium of its reprefentatives; and Elizabeth's fucceffors found, that fuch affiftance could not be procured, without redreifing the grievances of the people, and agreeing to fuch farther fecurity for their rights and privileges, as they thought proper to

demand.'

During the reign of the Stuarts, fubfidies and the whole train of feudal exactions, as wardship, marriage, &c. were given up, and benevolences, free gifts, and compulsive loans were for ever annihilated. And many new branches of revenue were introduced, fuch as excifes, ftamps, the postoffice, monthly affeffiments, &c.

But this period is particularly remarkable for enabling us to form fome kind of judgement of the full extent of that heavy burden which the funding fyftem introduced into this kingdom.

The revenue of England, at the acceflion of the houfe of Stuart, anno 1602, was 500,000l. a year. Eighty-fix years afterwards, when James II. was expelled, it was raifed to about two millions the annual increment confequently was near 17,4411. At the fame rate of increafe, the revenue, anno 1774, eighty-fix years after the revolution, fhould only have been 3,500,000l. and ten years afterwards, anno 1784, ought not to have exceeded 3,674,4181. or perhaps, with the addition of Scotland, rather more than four millions a year. If the prefent income of the State, therefore, is about fourteen millions, ten millions of that fum may be attributed to the funding fyftem; and would not have exifted, if the extraordinary expences of the public had been defrayed by money exacted at the time, without leaving any burden upon pofterity. Indeed, four millions would be amply fufficient, at this time, to defray the charges of the civil lift, and of our peace establishment; if the load of taxes impofed to provide for the intereft of our public debts, did not raife the price of every commodity to fuch a height, as to render money much less efficient than it would otherwife be.

But, on the whole, though our circumftances might have been better, let us not too hastily either envy the fituation, or inyeigh against the conduct of our predeceffors. Lightly as we may ima gine they were burdened, yet they complained as loudly as we do, of the intolerable weight of taxes, and of the diftrefs and poverty which they occafioned: and though, inftead of adding to their own burdens, they thought themfelves juftifiable in bequeathing to their pofterity a confiderable part of that grievous load of public debt, under the preffure of which we now ftagger, let it alfo be remem. bered, that they delivered into our hands a well cultivated ifland; dependencies of great value and importance; an extenfive com merce; flourishing manufactures; a fuperior fyftem of agricul ture;

醒

1

ure; a high character for ability and valour; and, joined to all thefe advantages a fyftem of government, unequalled in the annals of mankind for the bleffings which it affords.'

Our author, in what he calls his fecond part, confiders the various modes of providing for the expences of a nation. He fpeculates on public debts in general, on the public debts of England, prior to the revolution 1688; on the rife and progrefs of our prefent national debt, and on the Reps hitherto taken to diminish the capital and reduce the intereft of the national debt, giving an account of the different plans fuggefted for that purpofe, All these subjects with the principal queftions arifing out of them, our author treats with great method and perfpicuity, intermixing occafionally, with the plans and fyftems of other men, fome reflections, obfervations, and hints of his own. Of these hints fome are worthy of the public attention. For éxample. On the fubject of the funds for the payment of the public debts, he fuggefts the following idea, “That every means fhould be adopted that might have a tendency to encourage individuals, when they have no near "relations, to leave their fortune and property to the

public" He starts a queftion, whether if the fums that have been taken from the finking fund, and applied to the dif charge of our funded incumbrances, had been expended folely in making Great-Britain one populous and cultivated field or garden; the nation could not have born the whole debt with lefs difficulty than it now can fupport the debt as it has been reduced? The objects to which he would apply part of the finking fund are, the fisheries and agriculture: of its application to agriculture, he fays, "Twenty-four millions laid out in promoting the cultivation "of the foil, would have rendered every acre in the king"dom productive of fome valuable article. No more

"well founded complaints would be heard, that the num"ber of the people had decreased, that the poor wanted "encouragement to induftry, or the means of employ"ment."

There is another object of ftill more importance, perhaps to this trading nation, than even the fisheries or agriculture, that might be highly promoted by a wife application of public revenue, and that is our manufactures; as has been illuftrated in a moft ingenious manner by the author of a late publication intitled The Increase of Manufactures &c. propofed in regulations for the intereft of money: A plan that might be tried at a small rifque, and whofe good effects, if they should be produced at all, would be visible at once, and of immenfe extent. To what that author has faid

concerning

concerning the national benefits of his plan, we may add, that the increafe of manufactures would be the very best incitement that could be applied to induftry, in fishing, and in agriculture.

In Mr. Sinclair's ftyle, though generally not incorrect, we meet with fome grammatical inaccuracies. But if we eftimate the merits of Mr. Sinclair's performance by an higher ftandard than the minutiae of grammar, we shall find that he is intitled to the merit of an induftrious compiler, who arranges his matter with order, and makes his felections with judgement. The facts he records The facts he records are neceffarily drawn from other writers: and it is alfo the views of other writers that form the most valuable part of what we shall call the fpeculative part of his performance. Although he himfelf confiders his publication as the firft "Attempt at a "financial history on an enlarged fcale;" and we readily allow, that no author, that we know of, treats his fubject under the fame title, yet his fubject, or rather subjects have been handled by innumerable writers, lawyers, politicians, and hiftorians. From the works of his predeceffors he borrows largely, and candidly acknowledges the receipt. On this literary receipt, we mean not to impofe any other cenfure than this, that in the work before us, which is not a bad financial dictionary, as far as it goes, there is very little indeed that is original; nor indeed did the end in view require it.

The historical and fpeculative digreffions in this publication, though not ftrictly connected with the defign, may yet be excused as affording an agreeable variety and relief to the reader. But to a perfon converfant in literature, this entertainment is not a little obftructed by the conftant recollection that the reflections or general views prefented to him are no other than what he has feen before in the writings of Hume, Blackftone, Campbell, Whitaker, Brady, Maddox, Lord Littleton, &c. &c.

The fpeculations in this performance, though not original, are generally plaufible, and fuch as are not manifeftly fallacious. But in the fecond chapter of the first part of this publication, we meet with a theory which is evidently unfolid.

It is a fingular and aftonishing circumftance, that the province. of Gaul alone fhould have been able, about a century ago, to maintain a body of men equal to the whole military, and naval eftablishments of the Roman empire; and it is more than probable, that the revenues of France, of Spain, and of Great-Britain, joined together, are at this time equal in amount to the whole income of that empire, when it was moft flourishing and oft extended.