whole world should witness, can be written down by falsehood and defamatiou? The experiment has been tried. You have wit nessed the scene. Our fellow citizens have looked on cool and collected. They saw the latent source from which these outrages proceeded. They gathered around their public functionaries; and when the constitution called them to the decision by suf frage, they pronounced their verdict, ho nourable to those who had served them, and consolatory to the friend of man, who believes he may be entrusted with the con. troul of his own affairs.--No inference is here intended that the laws provided by the states against false and defamatory publications should not be inforced. He who has time renders a service to the public morals and public tranquillity, in reforming these abuses by the salutary coercions of the law. But the experiment is noted to prove that, since truth and reason have maintained their ground against false opinions in league with false facts, the press confined to truth, needs no other legal restraint. The public judgement will correct false reasonings and opinions, on a full hearing of all parties, and no other definite line can be drawn between the inestimable liberty of the press, and its demoralizing licentiousness. If there be still improprieties which this rule would not restrain, its supplement must be sought in the censorship of public opinion.—— Contemplating the union of sentiment now manifested so generally, as arguing harmony and happiness to our future course, I offer to our country sincere congratulations. With those too not yet rallied to the same point, the disposition to do so is gaining strength. Facts are piercing through the veil drawn over them; and our doubting brethren will at length see that the mass of their fellowcitizens, with whom they cannot yet resolve to act, as to principles and measures think as 'they think, and desire what they desire. That our wish as well as theirs, is that the public efforts may be directed honestly to the public good, that peace be cultivated, civil and religious liberty unassailed, law and order preserved, equality of rights maintained, and that state of property, equal or unequal, which results to every man from his own industry or that of his fathers. When satisfied of these views, it is not in human nature that they should not approve and support them. In the meantime let us cherish them with patient affec tion. Let us do them justice, and more than justice, in all competitions of interest; and we need not doubt that truth, reason, and their own interest, will at length pre

individuals -among them, who feel themselves something in the present order of things, and fear to become nothing in any other, These persons inculcate a sanctimonious reverence for the customs of their ancestors; that whatever they did must be done through all time; that reason is a false guide, and to advance under its counsel in their physical, moral, or political condition, is perilous innovation: that their duty is to remain as their Creator made them, ignorance being safety, and knowledge full of danger. In short, my friends, among them also is seen the action and counter-action of good sense and of bigotry. They too have their anti-philosophists, who find an interest in keeping things in their present state; who dread reformation, and exert all their faculties to maintain the ascendancy of habit over the duty of improving our reason and obeying its mandates.--In giving these outlines, I do not mean, to arrogate to myself the merit of measures. That is due, in the first place, to the reflecting character of our citizens at large, who, by the weight of public opinion, influence and strengthen the public measures. It is due to the sound discretion with which, they select from among themselves those to whom they confide the legislative duties. It is due to the zeal and wisdom of the characters thus selected, who lay the foundation of public happiness in wholesome laws, the execution of which alone remains for others; and it is due to the able and faihful auxiliaries, whose patriotism has associated them with me in the executive functions.- —During this course of administration, and in order to disturb it, the artillery of the press has been levelled against us, charged with whatever its licentiousness could devise or dare. These abuses of an institution so important to freedom and science, are deeply to be regretted, inasmuch as they tend to lessen its usefulness, and to sap its safety. They might, perhaps, have been corrected by the wholesome punishments reserved to, and provided by, the laws of the several states, against falsehood and defamation. But public du ties more urgent, press on the time of pub. lic servants, and the offenders have therefore been left to find their punishment in the public indignation.--Now was it uninteresting to the world thai an experiment should be fairly and fully made, whether freedom of discussion, unaided by power, is not sufficient for the propagation and protection of truth?-Whether a government, conducting itself in the true spirit of its constitution, with zeal and purity, and doing no act which it would be unwilling the

vail, will gather them into the fold of their country, and will complete that entire union of opinion, which gives to a nation the blessings of harmony, and the benefit of all its strength.I shall now enter on the duties to which my fellow-citizens have again called me; and shall proceed in the spirit of those principles which they have approved. I fear not that any motives of interest may lead me astray; I am sensible of no passion which could reduce me knowingly from the path of justice; but the weakness of human nature, and the limits of my own understanding, will produce errors of judgement sometimes injurious to your interests, I shall need, therefore, ail the indulgence I have heretofore experienced; the want of it certainly will not lessen with increasing years. I shall need too the favour of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old, from their native land, and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessaries and comforts of life; who has covered our infaney with his providence, and our riper years with his wisdom and his power; and to whose goodness I ask you to join with me in supplications, that he will so enlighten the minds of your servants, guide their councils, and prosper their measures, that whatsoever they do shall result in your gobd, and shall secure, to you the peace, friendship, and approbation of all nations.

THOMAS JEFFERSON.

REFORM OF FINANCIAL ABUSES. LETTER II.

SIR,In my letter of the 11th. I stated generally the defects of the method in use of making up the public accounts. I shal! now proceed to expose those defects in detail, and to examine the principles on which the public income is collected, received from the collectors: paid into the Exchequer; and finally paid by the state to its creditors. The most obvious and fundamental defect of the present method is, that of its being merely an account of things, and not as it ought to be an account of persons. An account of the things that are taxed; and the things that are paid for. So far, no doubt, the account is of great service, and should be continued in its present form. But instead of being the only account in which any information is to be procured concerning the revenues of the country, it should be considered as a mere supplementary account, abstracted and compiled from the NATIONAL LEDGER.From the nature and extent of the revenue and expenditure of this country it will necessarily happen, that great

confidence must be placed in many individuals. But how is it to be expected that the public money can be safe from peculation, if these individuals know, that their accounts are never fairly before the public? Whereever confidence of this nature is placed, checques and control should be instituted in the same proportion. But how can this species of security be fully attained unless the account of every individual is fairly brought forward?It will probably, be said, that the public business is too extensive to be detailed according to the method adopted by persons in trade. This objection may be set aside, first by referring to the principle of mercantile accounts; and secondly, by the practice of them.-Every one the least acquainted with these principles, must know, that the first is that of subdividing the business to be placed under account in such a manner, that each distinct part may be kept in a distinct account, and that this previous arrangement so entirely precludes confusion that one account of the whole may at any time be made out, not only very accurately, but with great dispatch. It is exactly so with an army, when each company of a battalion knows its duty, and is once in its pro per place, the whole can be moved in an in

stant into bodies of more extended or more solid form; and no general will surely complain of having too many battalions under

his command.In the same manner with respect to accounts, if the principle of previous subdivision and arrangement is acted upon, the number of subdivisions cannot be an objection to the system, because no two of them can interfere with each other and create confusion. The whole will be easily consolidated into one account of balances, and as each balance will refer to the account on which it is struck, the receipt and application of every tax paid by the subject will be thus exposed to the investigation of the public. But, secondly, in addition to this refutation of the objection that may be made to the mercantile system of keeping accounts, there is the practice of the Bank of England, that fully proves its utility as applied to bu siness of even immense extent. Without enumerating the particulars of the business of the Bank, of which the principal parts are the management of a capital of several millions, and the general receipt and payment of the public revenue, it is sufficient to be known that 700 clerks are constantly employed in conducting it. There is no one department of the state in which so much business is done, not even in the excise, in which the greatest revenue is received; ner in the navy department, in which the largest

sum is expended. Let then every one who is employed in collecting, receiving, or paying the public money keep his day book, journal, and ledger. Let copies of his ledger be weekly transmitted to the head of the department to which he belongs. There det an annual account be made up from the balances of these ledgers, to be laid before the House of Commons, but with this ac. count let there be also laid before it an exact copy of each person's ledger. If these ledgers should be too voluminous to be printed, arrangements should be made for their being so placed in a library of the House of Commons, that any of them might be inspected with perfect freedom and the greatest faciJity, not only by members, but by other persons under certain qualifications. By these means the accounts of every department might be speedily investigated, the money of the public might be traced from the pocket of the subject to the legal application of it by the government; all persons concerned in the collecting or the disbursement of the revenue, would feel a constant control operating over them, and if frauds were committed it would then be possible to detect them.I maintain, therefore, Mr. Cobbett, that there exist many solid reasons for adopting the same system in keeping the public accounts that merchants adopt in keeping theirs, and that there is not one reason upon which it can be said to be inap plicable. The necessity of some alteration is very obvious, and is it not then in perfect consistency with sound wisdom to follow the example of those who actually earn their bread by the punctuality of their dealings, and the accuracy of their accounts?--I shall now proceed to consider the principles upon which the taxes are collected, and those upon which they ought to be collected. It generally happens that the duty of assessing the tax and collecting it is performed by the same person; this is a practice radically bad, because there can exist no control over the rates assessed or the money received. It should always be a rule, that the rate of tax or duty to be paid should be assessed and regulated by one person, and the sum to be paid received by another. This is the case with respect to the assessed taxes, and the same method should be extended to every description of taxes. The labour being thus divided would be performed not only with more ease, but with more skill, and the offcers would be a check upon each other. The returns of the assessors to the heads of departments would enable them to judge

whether new assessments were necessary, and of the diligence or remissness of the collectors in executing their duty. The offices of collectors and receivers from sub-collectors should never be blended, because, if the principal collector should be dishonest, be will connive at, and probably promote the dishonesty of the sub collectors. And, lastly, no collector should upon any account be per mitted to act in the capacity of a paymaster, but be obliged to pay over the whole of his receipt without any abatement whatsoever to the authorised receiving officer. By rendering the business of collecting and paying quite distinct, the system of balances in collectors' hands may be altogether got rid of, and the account of the receipt of the revenue may be relieved from the new fangled distinction and confusion of "payments in anticipation of the receipt." But no more on this head till we come to the discussion of payments in general of the public money.

As to the duty of receivers of the public money, it clearly should be confined to the receiving of what has been previously received by the collectors, and to the payment of it into the Exchequer. They should in no instance perform the duty either of col lectors or of paymasters, and thus they would be the natural control over the collec tors, and have no excuse for keeping any ba lances in their hands.-According to these principles of collecting and receiving the public income, the account of it would be a simple account of the receipt, uninterrupted by deductions, drawbacks, incidents and an ticipations; the whole of the money paid by the subject would come into the Exchequer; and by this being made an indispensible step previous to any part of it being applied in payment, a system of paying it may be ar ranged as simple as the system of receiving it.But so long as collectors and receivers continue to act as paymasters, large bal.nces must be left in their hands, their accounts must be confused, and opportunities afforded of committing great frauds. The receipt and expenditure must be kept quite distinct to prevent these abuses. This is the only manner by which we can hope to eradicate completely the temptation to practise fraud, and the power of effecting it. And when I have a further opportunity of stating my plan for conducting the payment of the public money, I trust that I shall be able to shew that no more trouble will attend it, than attends the system which is at present followed.--1 am, &c. -VERAX. April 22,

1905.

[PRICE 10D.

TO THE SERIOUS AND IMPARTIAL CONSIDERATION OF THE HONEST, PATRIOTIC, AND LOYAL MEN OF ENGLAND ARE SUBMITTED THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS ON THE

CONDUCT or MR. PITT.

Freely to make observations on, openly and undisguisedly to approve of or to censure, the conduct of men in place and power, is the undoubted right of every subject of this realm; and, in every one, who, through the means of the press, undertakes to communicate political information to the public, it is not only a right but a duty. In speaking of the Liberty of the Press, we should always remember that which is but too often forgotten, to discriminate carefully as to the objects and the occasions, to which the due exercise of this liberty applies; because, from an indiscriminate application either of the words or of the thing, doubts frequently arise, and, indeed, it becomes a disputable point, whether the thing, of which we boast so much, be a good or an evil, and, of course, whether it ought to be encouraged or suppressed. The inutility, and the public as well as individual injury, in many cases, of exposing, through the means of the press, the faults of persons in private life, is so obvious, that, though no more than the truth be so exposed, the act, from whatever motive proceeding, seldom fails, in this puling age, to meet with general disapprobation. Perceiving this propensity of the mind, all those who wish to prevent a freedom of language with regard to public men, take care, first to confound public with private character and faults; next to give the appellation of slander to all censure indiscriminately; and, then to break forth into a high-wrought description of the odiousness and wickedness of slander.Whether the art of printing has proved, to mankind in general and to this nation in particular, a fortunate, or an unfortunate discovery; whether that mode of applying this art, which is here denominated the Liberty of the Press, ought, or ought not to have been tolerated; these are questions which we have not now to discuss. The art has been discovered; the Liberty of the Press exists; and, in exercising this liberty, we should not regard it as an indul

[642

gence; as something that is winked at; nor, with respect to our own duty, as a right which we may either exercise, or not, as our interest or our caprice may happen to dictate. We should recollect, that our laws, our public regulations and institutions, are framed with the knowledge of the existence of a certain influence in the press. All legislators leave something to be effected through the influence of religion, morality, and public opinion; and, ours fail not to make, besides, an allowance for the influence of the Press. The Liberty of the Press, therefore, really forms a part of the present constitution of our government; and, when exercised with respect to the public character or conduct of public men, there seems to be no sound reason for circumscribing it within any other boundary than that of the TRUTH; especially when it be remembered, that these public men have it at all times in their power to cause the press to be used in their behalf; and when it is well-known, that they do cause it so to be used, and that, too, at the expense of the public. A sophistical mode of statement has been employed in order to screen public men from the animadversions. of the press. We have been told, that their character is public property; that it ought, therefore, to be carefully watched over by the law. True, in the plain sense of the words. But, by this careful watching is meant a power in the law to punish men for writing truth, if in censure, of public men. Here, then, is the deception: the character. of public men is public property; but, it is their true character; and no man should, therefore, be liable to punishment for writing the truth of public men; yet, I am afraid, that, if any one had written the truth of Lord Melville two months ago, he would not have been permitted to prove that truth; and, probably, he might have lost his ears for endeavouring to open the eyes of his countrymen. While, however, this doctrine restrains the press within very narrow bounds as to the follies and the crimes of men in power, it makes ample amends on the side of their wisdom and their virtue, both of which, in the highest possible degree, we are freely permitted to attribute to them, though they are well known to be fools or