&Wic;HEN I see a Proposal for raising of Money, with a more than ordinary Shew of Zeal for Publick Good, what I first look for is, a certain little Thing in a Corner, which may be pro&rehy;perly call'd, The JOB; or what is to be got by the Projectors? And, to say Truth, I was not long, before I disco&rehy;ver'd This in the Proposal now under Consideration. And that I may unde&rehy;ceive some well-meaning People, who seem not to dislike the Project, and like&rehy;wise unmask those pretended Patriots; I will endeavour, in few Words to prove, That the Redemption of the Publick Funds, by breaking into Parliamentary Contracts, as propos'd in the Journals of the Wednesday-Club, and in the two Schemes extracted out of the said Book are Unjust, Dishonourable, Unnecessary, Im&rehy;politick, and lastly, a manifest Roguery, calculated to draw a Sum of Money out of the Pockets of the fair Purchasers into those of the Projectors, and their Con&rehy;federates.
Before I enter into the Subject, I think I am bound to declare, That I only examine the aforemention'd Jour&rehy;nal; and, that I am so far from suspect&rehy;ing any ill Design in those of higher Posts, whose Business it is to contrive Schemes for the Payment of Publick Debts, that I think, by the Contempt they shew of a little popular Clamour on this occasion, they give Proof of their righteous Intentions, and of a steddy and publick Spirit; and I hope they will be supported in all their honourable Proceedings, in so commendable a Work, which, considering their good Judg&rehy;ment, must tend as well to support the Credit and Honour of the Nation, as to pay its Debts.
As to the Injustice of a forc'd Redu&rehy;ction of Funds that are not redeemable, I need say no more than to state the Case of any private Person or Corpora&rehy;tion, who has made an absolute Sale of an Annuity; whither such a Person can in Justice force his Annuitant to refund Part of the Money already receiv'd, or retrench any Part of his Annuity for the Time to come, or give up his Secu&rehy;rity upon Payment of his Original Price? and I desire the Publisher of this learn&rehy;ed Journal to apply his Argumentations in this Case, and see how ridiculous they will appear. I suppose this great Lord tells his Annuitant,
That when he made the Bargain, his Ne&rehy;cessities were pressing, and consequently the Contract disadvantageous.
That Money, at that Time, was at a higher Interest, because scarcer, and the Hazard of losing it greater; but now he could borrow upon easier Terms; therefore, he must either take back his Money, or rebate a third Part of his Annuity.
That if the Annuitant would not consent to this Rebatement, he should be forc'd to rack his Tenants, or mortgage some Part of his Rents.
That by such a Rebatement, his Tenants would sell their Goods at Market cheaper, of which the Annuitant himself, who common&rehy;ly bought of them, would have the Advan&rehy;tage; and therefore Interest, as well as Ju&rehy;stice, oblig'd him to consent to such a Re&rehy;batement.
That he had other Creditors who had not so advantageous a Bargain, as the Annui&rehy;tant, and some who had of their own ac&rehy;cord disburs'd Money for some of his Predecessors who had no Security at all; that its was highly unjust his Creditors should be up&rehy;on an unequal Foot.
That it was well known, that some Year ago, when his Credit was not so good, his Annuitants transfer'd for Two-thirds of the Money, which they now value their Annui&rehy;ties at; in short, if they were willing to ac&rehy;cept of that Sum, there it was; if not, they might take their Course, he had those about him that would make them all deliver up their Securities.
I think this is the Sum of what is said through 276 Pages of the Journ&rehy;alist. If we shift the Scene again, and in Place of this great Lord, substitute a Nation or Body-Politick, the Injustice will be only so much the more flagrant and scandalous, as the Person offending is more conspicuous. The Rules of Right and Wrong are immutable, and will no more bend to the Great than to the Small.
Before I go further, I must take no&rehy;tice of the Impropriety of the Word Redemption, in the Sense of the Author. Redemption, or buying-back a Thing, implies a Contract between the Buyer and Seller, where both must act as free Agents: But if one Man forceth an&rehy;other to part with his Goods at what Price he pleases, in private Persons it is called Robbery, in Governments, Re&rehy;sumption; which Word I will beg leave to use sometimes, instead of the other, as more proper.
P. 250. One of the Author's chief Arguments for the Justice of such a National Resumption, is taken from the Law of God, and the Example of good King Nehemiah; but unfortunately this will prove the Resumption of the Whole, not only to be just, but necessary. The Law of God prohibits the Taking of Usury (by which, among the Jews, was under&rehy;stood all manner of Interest) and so, I sup&rehy;pose, if the Authors Scheme were pur&rehy;su'd, this Law, enforc'd by a short Act of Parliament, would, in Time, resume the Whole, as it doth now a Third. The Example of good King Nehemiah is strongly recommended to his pre&rehy;sent Majesty, as worthy of Imitation, and a shrewd Hint given of the Period when such a Total Resumption is to commence, viz. the Seventh or Sabba&rehy;tical Year, as the last Act and Deed of the present House of Commons; but, I believe, they are more likely to send the Author to Bethlehem Hospital, than to take his Advice. This Argumenta&rehy;tion is so silly, that it hardly deserves an Answer: I only beg leave to observe, That the Resumption of Nehemiah was a Judgment upon the known and estab&rehy;lish'd Law of the Country, which pro&rehy;hibited taking of Usury; and this De&rehy;termination acquiesced in and consent&rehy;ed to by the Possessors of these Mort&rehy;gages, not a Law ex post facto, to dissolve a lawful Contract. So much for the Theology of the Wednesday&rehy;Club.
But I would gladly ask, what he means by Usury, and how he applies it in this Case? Money is like other Commodities; some&rehy;times dear, sometimes cheap; according to the Proportion of its Plenty, to its Vent or Demand. If a Person has purchas'd, for a Price specify'd, a certain Quanti&rehy;ty of a Commodity from me, when it was dear, would he pay me only according to the Price-Currant, when it is sunk a Third in Value? Let our Author apply that Maxim to common Traffick, and try what Credit it will produce amongst Mankind. The Case of the Annuities is still stronger; for the Price, that is, the Security that entitles a Man to it, is actually paid, and he would have the Government (the Purchaser in this Case) resume a Part back again, because he can now buy the same Commodity cheaper: Indeed, where there is a Clause of Redemption, the Restitution of the Mo&rehy;ney is the full Performance of the Con&rehy;tract.
P. 252. But, says the Author, Clau&rehy;ses of Redemption are plain&rehy;ly meant, tho' not express'd. I would gladly have the Author, and his famous Club, publish a Sup&rehy;plement to the Statutes, consisting of Clauses in Acts of Parliament, that are meant, but not express'd; and let this new Sort of Law be set up, and I will promise him, not only the Govern&rehy;ment Securities, but all others whatso&rehy;ever, will sink 20 per Cent in Value. Our Author's Scheme is compos'd of too high-relish'd French Ingredients: The Regent's Method of paying of publick Debts, and Lewis the XIVth's Method of explaining publick Trea&rehy;ties; with a small Dash of the Spirit, where the Letter is defective.
There is another Cause that raises the Value of Money in a Loan; the Ha&rehy;zard of losing it; in Proportion to which Chance, the whole Value of the Adven&rehy;ture is to be calculated. Thus 100l. a Year, payable upon the Contingen&rehy;cy of one Person's out-living another, whose Life is equally good, is only to be reckon'd and purchas'd as 50, and only the half of the absolute Value to be payed for it; and when the Propri&rehy;etor of such a Reversion comes to be entitled to his 100l. a Year, would it not be highly Unjust to give him only Possession of 50, because his original Price answer'd only to that Sum? From an Analogous Reasoning, all the Dan&rehy;gers of the Government, and all the possible Cases of Insolvency, must be reckon'd in to the Account of the Pur&rehy;chasers; and it would be full as Un&rehy;just in the Government, as in the Sel&rehy;ler of the Reversion, to deduct a part of the Sum, in Consideration of its greater Security and Credit, when it is now in better Circumstances. I dare say, had the Purchasers had the least Apprehension of Schemes, such as the Author has set up, the Govern&rehy;ment must have paid still double for their Bargains.
But this Redemption will appear more monstrous, if one considers the Cases of Widows, and Orphans, entitled to Annuities by Marriage-Settlements for valuable Considerations; and I de&rehy;sire the Author, or any one for him, to unravel the Difficulties of the single Case of Reversions, with any tolerable Justice or Perspicuity.
To alledge, as he does, P. 143. the Smalness of their Number, and conse&rehy;quently, that the Injustice is inconsidera&rehy;ble, because not extensive, is in effect no better than this: Gentlemen, There is a Necessity for making a Law which will involve a great many Innocent Persons in Sufferings; but you may depend upon it, according to the nicest Calculations, not above 6 per Cent. of you shall be hang'd. As to his other Proposal of distinguishing such Cases of Compassion, I hope the Government will make the Wednesday-Club Commis&rehy;sioners of Enquiry for the forfeited Estates of the Annuitants, and apply&rehy;ing of such Præmiums; and I'll pro&rehy;mise you they will not change with the Commissioners of the forfeited E&rehy;states of the Rebels.
After having prov'd the Author's Scheme of Resumption unjust, I think I need not add, that it is dishonoura&rehy;ble; is it not then an unpardonable Presumption in this Journalist, to sup&rehy;pose a British Parliament will do, what the greatest Scoundrel would not avow? Refuse to pay a just Debt, break their Faith, violate a solemn Contract: A Parliament compos'd of Persons, that have always made the Supporting of the Funds their Badge of Distinction, from those of the opposite Party, whom they have branded with contrary Sentiments: Will they resume the Nick-names they have given their Antagonists at Elections, and suffer the Tory-Spunge to be thrown in their Teeth by the Populace? Tell it not in Gath. Can he suppose, that this House of Commons has forgot what they told his Majesty two Years ago? That nothing can contribute more towards preser&rehy;ving the Credit of the Nation, than a strict Observance of all Parliamentary Engage&rehy;ments, which we are firmly resolved upon all Occasions inviolably to maintain.
Can they put such an Interpretation upon his Majesty's Words, recom&rehy;mending the Payment of the Publick Debts, as if they signify'd a Resump&rehy;tion, when his Majesty told them in express Terms, at their first Session, that nothing can contribute more to the Support of the Credit of the Nation, than a strict Observance of all Parliamentary En&rehy;gagements
? What Punishment then is due to such Insolence, that can suppose, that the same House of Commons (with Reverence be it spoken) will, like Common Cheats, promise any Thing in their Streights, and when those are over, leave their Creditors the rueful Exerience of their forward Credulity?
This Method of Redemption, in the Au&rehy;thor's Sense, if apply'd with the Equality so much pleaded for, will raise a much greater Sum than what is propos'd; for it ought to affect equally all that have made advantageous Bargains with the Government; then, why is it not equal&rehy;ly just to repay to the present Proprie&rehy;tors of the Forfeited Estates in Ireland their Original Price, as to the Annui&rehy;tants? They have both the same Securi&rehy;ty, the Faith of an Act of Parliament; only the Landed-Men have made the more advantageous Bargain, for their Purchase is risen to be near double in Value; and the Commissioners for such a Redemption, can as easily value Re&rehy;pairs and Improvements as the Extra&rehy;ordinary Cases of necessitous Annui&rehy;tants. Nay, if the Author pleases, let us carry his Level into another Field, and redeem all the Fee Farm Rents that have been alienated from the Crown at an under Value; and what is infinitely more just still, resume the Exorbitant Grants of the Crown for several Years past; for there is no Pro&rehy;portion between him that paid the just Value, and him that paid nothing; between one that has a Parliamentary Security, and one that has none; be&rehy;tween those that can spare it, and those that can not: And if they had Parlia&rehy;mentary Securities, it is always more just to take back an extravagant Present, than to defraud a fair Cre&rehy;ditor.
As an Instance of the Right of Parlia&rehy;ments to seize upon private Property, where the Publick Good demands it: It is said, that if the Government had occasion for a Fortification, or a Har&rehy;bour, they can oblige the Proprietor to part with the Ground, where they are to build. I answer, not in Justice, without paying him the Value. In&rehy;deed, Governments have sometimes li&rehy;mited the Price, when the Proprietor was extravagant in his Demands; but there is no Parallel between a Case where the Safety of the Government is immediately concern'd, and one where it is not; where no publick Faith is bro&rehy;ken, and where it manifestly is. Besides, such a Power by Acknowledgment belonging to all Governments, all Pro&rehy;prietors of Lands, purchase under the Chance of the Exercise of it, as much as under that of a Land-Tax. This leads me to the Case of Necessity that is pleaded.
And here I beg leave to observe, that Necessity set up in Opposition to Justice, is a terrible Plea in the Hands of the Mighty. Necessity may be a Plea for one Man's eating another; and in its full extent, upon some Occasion, might ju&rehy;stify the Victualling a Ship with some of the Annuitants, as much as it does now seizing upon their Property.
To state this Case as disadvantage&rehy;ously for my self as possible; there are about 40 Millions of Debts, with In&rehy;terest above 5 per Cent. of which there are about 21 Millions Annuities; of these Annuities about 10 Millions of 99 Years, and 11 of 32 Years; of the 11 Millions of 32 Years Annuities, there are, I think, 2,400,000l. which are not redeemable; the rest are: But suppose the Debt of 11 Millions of 32 Years Annuities were left as it is, they will all expire, either a Year before the last Period fix'd by the Author, for Payment of publick Debts; or at the time, or three Years after the time. The remainder then is 19 Millions, which is a pretty large Subject for the Frugality of the Government to work upon, and yet it is manifestly practica&rehy;ble to pay this Debt off. For an An&rehy;nuity of 1 per Cent will pay off a prin&rehy;cipal Sum in 33 Years, with Interest at 6 per Cent; and in 35 Years with Interest at 5 per Cent; so that the Sum of 190,000l. will pay off 19 Millions in that time; and 290,000l. will pay off the whole 29 Millions of publick Debt, (exclusive of the Annuities of 99 Years) according to the Author's extra&rehy;vagant way of reckoning: But suppose by a settled Condition, (of which we have the happy Prospect under his pre&rehy;sent Majesty) and a great Abatement of Annual Expences, the Nation should be able to make some great Payments of the Capital, or raise half a Million a Year; that half Million will pay off the whole 29 Millions in 28 Years, (two Years more than the Author's period) reckoning Interest at 5 per Cent.
As for the 10 Millions of 99 Years Annuities they are no less redeemable than the other Funds; the single Que&rehy;stion is, Whether this is to be done at a forc'd Price, or at a Price by fair Con&rehy;tract, between the Buyer and Seller? (which I think can only, with proprie&rehy;ty of Speech, be call'd Redemption:) For if a private Person can purchase an An&rehy;nuity, a Government can; all the diffe&rehy;rence between the Case of a volunta&rehy;ry, and that of a forc'd Redemption (which I will put at 4 Years purchase) will be 2,788,275l. 17s. and 6d. This I affirm is not a Sum to be put in Ballance with the Honour and Cre&rehy;dit of the Nation. It is certainly a very practicable Thing for the Govern&rehy;ment to convert those 99 Years An&rehy;nuities, into a redeemable Debt; and let them but open a Subscription at any time, with some Advantage to the Annuitants, at the currant Interest of Money at that time, and the Bulk of them will be subscrib'd: And to a Go&rehy;vernment that supports its Credit, it will be all one whether the Price of these Annuities be high or low, be&rehy;cause they can only rise as the Interest of Money sinks, the latter being the Cause of the former; yea, it will be the Advantage of the Government that they should be high, rather than low, because they can in that case borrow Money at so much a lower Interest, either to buy off those Annuities, or to pay off those other Funds that are redeemable.
I have in these few Hints purposely avoided precise Calculation, for the Reader's ease; and if there be any little Error in the Numbers, it will not break the thread of the Reason&rehy;ing.
It is true, the Annuitants, if Parlia&rehy;mentary-Contracts are observ'd, must be in a better Condition than the o&rehy;ther Creditors of the Government; but to such as find fault with this pro&rehy;ceeding, the Government may answer, as the Landlord in the Gospel did to the Murmurers, against his seemingly une&rehy;qual Dealing with his Day-Labourers; Friend, I do thee no wrong, didst thou not agree with me for a Penny? take that is thine; is thine Eye evil, because I am good
? This may be said for the Annuitants, that those Creditors of the Government who have had their Money upon the Stocks, have had many Opportunities of improving their Capital, and turn&rehy;ing it to Advantage, and which the Annuitants have been deprived of; for the loss of which, this new Advantage may be but a reasonable Compensa&rehy;tion.
It will not be improper, in this Place, to apply my self to the Landed&rehy;Men, and desire them to consider, that tho' this Project of Resumption seems alluring at first Sight; yet it is high&rehy;ly probable it may be the Cause of greater Suffering to them, than all the present Advantage they can reap by it; for they stand, in relation to the Government, as a perpetual Security to a Debtor; and whatever false Steps the Debtor makes, the Security must at last pay for it. And if by the Wound which such a forc'd Re&rehy;duction gives to publick Credit, the Government, in some future Exigen&rehy;cy, should be forc'd to give exorbi&rehy;tant Interest, they will feel it more sensibly than they did some Years in the last War, when their Lands sunk several Years Purchase. One Thing is plain, That sinking the Credit in the Government, will naturally hind&rehy;er the Lowering of Interest, which is always to their Prejudice.
As to the Necessity of Relieving the People from the heavy Taxes upon which those Annuities are pay&rehy;able, it must be consider'd, that ac&rehy;cording to the Author's Scheme, ei&rehy;ther those Taxes, or Taxes equal in Value to them, must be continu'd for a lesser Term of Years; and it will not be any Hardship to change their Funds, if the Annuitants have an equal Security, and the same Sum as punctually paid.
I have suppos'd hitherto Interest at 5 per Cent; but it is almost certain that Interest will still sink much lower, as the Government pays off its Debts; for what can their Creditors do with their Mony? Keep it by them? That is worse than the lowest Interest. Employ it in Trade? That is pretty much charg'd already: Besides, the Bulk of such Dealers in Mony are unskilful, and timorous in Projects of Trade. Will they carry it Abroad? There they have less Interest, and worse Security. Purchase Land? That will rise in proportion. I cannot see what is possible for them to do, but to lend it back to the Government up&rehy;on any Terms. This will appear evi&rehy;dent to any one, who considers what the Proprietors of Ten Millions of South-Sea Stock could do with their Mony, if the Government should ten&rehy;der it? To be sure they must lend it back at Three per Cent. rather than keep it by them, and all this with the Credit and Honour of the Government; whereas on the contrary, should the Government force the Pro&rehy;prietors, by a Law, no Body can tell what Terms they must borrow Mony upon for the future.
These few Hints may serve to prove, that there is not so great a Necessity for so violent an Expedient, which the Greatest will hardly justify. I proceed now to my third Head, which is to shew, That a forc'd Re&rehy;duction of the Funds is highly im&rehy;politick.
What Value can be set upon the Faith and Honour of a British Parlia&rehy;ment? What has carry'd us through two such Terrible and Expensive Wars, as History can hardly parallel? What has sav'd us in the most dangerous Junctures? Nothing but the Opinion of the World, that the British Nation would never violate their Faith: And as this Principle has sav'd us in our past Distresses, it is able to do so in Twenty more: And shall we barter this invaluable Jewel for a paltry Sum of Mony? Must the Generous, Steed that has carry'd the Soldier through Twenty Battles, and may carry him through many more, be knock'd in the Head to save the Ex&rehy;pences of Keeping? Can any Man say we shall never have occasion a&rehy;gain for National Credit? Perhaps it may be answer'd, if such a Juncture should happen, the propos'd Resum&rehy;ption, with the Land and Malt-Tax, will enable the Government to car&rehy;ry on any War they may be engaged in afterwards, without being ob&rehy;liged to borrow. This is so absurd, that the very Insinuation is enough to Ruin the Publick Credit entirely; for the Surplusses of the Funds, by the Author's Scheme, being engag'd for Payment of the principal Sums, the applying them to the Yearly Service, must put the Proprietors out of all Hopes of ever being reimburs'd, and involve the Nation in insuperable Dif&rehy;ficulties; for this is seizing first upon the Interest, and then upon their Prin&rehy;cipal. To all this the Author an&rehy;swers, with a Never fear: England will always find Mony: Great Pre&rehy;miums will always bring it in upon an Exigency. But is it not obvious for a mony'd Man to reason about his Pre&rehy;mium, from the Experience of the Reduction of his Interest? 'Tis true, Gentlemen, you allow me such a Rebate now, but when this Difficulty is over, I shall only be paid according to the Sum ad&rehy;vanc'd; and be told, That I Prey'd upon the Necessities of the Government. Can a private Man who refuseth to pay a just Debt, ever hope to borow again in his Difficulties? If I grant, that a private Person may, because the Law can compel him to pay if he is able; I am sure a Government never can, because they cannot be compell'd. Cre&rehy;dit is compos'd of Ability and Wil&rehy;lingness to pay; in Persons under the Power of Laws, there is a Remedy against the Latter; but Unwillingness in a Government, is an infinite Ob&rehy;stacle which no force can remove: Therefore, their Faith should be invi&rehy;olable, as much as their Power is un&rehy;controulable.
If the Government should make the smallest forc'd Rebatement of their Debts, can any Man say where this will stop? Necessity and Convenience are Arbitrary Things, of which every Man judges according to his present Views; but these Points are still more ticklish, when they take the Mony out of one Man's Pocket and put it into another's: In such a Case, few will trust to the Rectitude of Judg&rehy;ment, when they have Experience of the Perverseness of Inclinations. Can any Man say to Violence, so far thou shalt go and no further? The Plea of the Resumption-Men, when the Fences of Justice are once broke down, may serve as well for the Whole, as for the Part. Thus it may happen, in process of Time, That as one Sett begins to rub out a Part of the Score with a wet Finger; another (by the Assistance of the same Argumentations) may come at last with their Spunge and rub out the Remainder.
I might, on this Head, appeal to the Experience of Governments which have suffer'd by breaking their Faith in Mony-Contracts, and never could again be trusted in their Exigences. I believe the Examples of the Me&rehy;thods that are now practic'd in France and Holland, in relation to publick Funds, do not prove, by their Con&rehy;sequences, that they are worthy of Imitation; and I will be bold to aver, That should any new War happen, the Credit of the British Parliament would be of more Advantage to us, than all the Funds they have redeem'd with the Loss of their Credit: Yet it is from the Proceedings of France that the Author seems to have co&rehy;pied his Scheme, with this differ&rehy;ence, that the Determinations of the French Chambre Ardente, are more equi&rehy;table than those which our Author offers to a British Parliament; for no Body will deny that it is more just to make some Individuals, (which by base and indirect Means have over&rehy;gorg'd themselves with the Publick Treasure) spew up their unrighteous Gain, than to defalk from the fair Purchasers. I will go further, and affirm, That the Example of our Neighbours is rather an Argument for a contrary Proceeding: And it will be more for the Interest and Glory of Great Britain, after so many Millions spent, to be the only Na&rehy;tion of Europe that never broke their Faith; a Proceeding that some time or other may be of infinite Use to the Nation.
I beg Pardon for spending so much Time in proving a self-evident Pro&rehy;position, viz. That refusing to pay a just Debt, will sink the Credit of any Person, Body-Corporate or Poli&rehy;tick, and that such a one can never, for the future, borrow Mony upon such easy Terms as before: So that the single Question, as to the Point of Expediency of this Method, to&rehy;wards obtaining the End propos'd (the Payment of Publick Debts) is this: Whither the Government, by a strict observance of all Parliamentary&rehy;Contracts, had not better take the Advantage of the Certainty of Low&rehy;ering of Interest, and consequently of borrowing Mony still upon easier and easier Terms, for redeeming the Funds that are redeemable, and contract&rehy;ing with the Proprietors of Funds of those that are not, than to pay off their Creditors by a forc'd Redu&rehy;ction, with the Prospect of never be&rehy;ing trusted for the future? A Politick much like that of the old Woman in the Fable, who ripp'd up the Bel&rehy;ly of her Hen that lay'd a golden Egg every Day, in order to find the Mine.
I come now to what I at first call'd, The JOB, which I take to be the Key to the whole Project, of which it is possible the Publisher may be ignorant.
Amongst the List of publick Debts the Author reckons thus:
| | l. |
Houshold Debts of King William - - | 600,000:00:00 |
Arrears of the Ar&rehy;my, and Debts of the late Queen | 2,000,000:00:00 |
| | 2,600,000:00:00 |
Here I desire the Reader to mark the knavish Way of Stating the last Article: The late Queen's Debts com&rehy;pose, with the Arrears of the Army, two Millions; when, perhaps, there are not Fifty thousand Pounds on the first Score, and not near that Sum be&rehy;yond what Her Majesty has left Effects to pay: But under this Head are huddled up all old Claims, I suppose, the Hun&rehy;dred and thirty thousand Pounds due to the Dutch Regiments, which their Agent never accounted for; a blasted JOB of many Years standing; and God know how many other Things be&rehy;sides, which are now Stock-jobbing about Town, and are rose from No&rehy;thing to 10 per Cent. Now let any Man judge, when such a Sum of des&rehy;perate Debts, (that to the Army ex&rehy;cepted,) are brought up, perhaps for 5 per Cent. what Sums may be got? I will be bold to say, here is a Temp&rehy;tation too strong for the Vertue even of some former Houses of Commons, or perhaps any less Honest than the Present. To make this Project more palatable, and the Solicitors more nu&rehy;merous, all concern'd in these Deben&rehy;tures are engag'd in Interest to pro&rehy;mote it, and the Annuitants are fall'n upon because they are single Persons, and no Corporation, which is no small Artifice. Vide said Scheme.
Accordingly, mark how the Author lessens the Publick Debts, for Pay&rehy;ment of 39,602,043l. 03s. 07d. he immediately raises 42,000,000l. and besides the 42 Millions, a Sum of 62,000l. a Year, which will raise a Million and a half more. A plentiful Field &horfill;
This is plainly the Mystery of the whole Proposal; for I will always lay Gold to Silver, That where there is a Project of Twenty Millions of Publick Profit, and only Twenty Thou&rehy;sand of Private Gain, that the Twen&rehy;ty Thousand, and not the Twenty Millions, the Private and not the Publick Gain, gave Rise to the Pro&rehy;posal.
The Author's Proposal is no more Roguish, than the Methods by which he would bring it about.
In order to make the Annuitants sub&rehy;mit to this Redemption, they are threaten'd with a Law of Restitu&rehy;tion, p. 134, 135; with being Tax&rehy;ed, p. 181; with a Mob, p. 189; and lastly, such Principles advanc'd, as will prove the Necessity of a Lex Agraria; yea, an equal Division of Property throughout the whole King&rehy;dom; so hard it is to set Bounds to Injustice.
Lastly, This short Payment, and forc'd Redemption, is to be made with Exchequer-Bills, the Value of which is falsly calculated, from the Premium upon the present Exchequer-Bills; which can be exchang'd, every Moment, for ready Money; when on the contrary, such a new load of Bills must be at a considerable Discount, in proportion to their Increase; especially, when not cir&rehy;culated by the Bank.
Upon the whole, the state of the Case as it stands in the Proposal is,
Whether a Parliament will break their Faith, in order to de&rehy;faulk two per Cent. from the Annuitants, to give four per Cent. to those who have no Demand upon them at all?
Whether they will pay a Debt twice over?
Whether they will raise the pri&rehy;vate Credit of the Crown, upon the Ruin of the Credit of the Na&rehy;tion?
Whether it is not more just to pay the private Debts of the late King William, and Queen Anne, out of their Exorbitant Grants, than out of the Estates of the An&rehy;nuitants?
―
FINIS.
―