Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1832-12-10
ALEXANDRIA GAZETTE.
TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.

l
avOwed reference 70 controversy on the same
subject, to which have been party. The OBJ
ject of this circular is to obtain an account Of
the town, village county, city and state charges,
in the country together with the cost Of religion,
and that Of maintaining the rOads:-in short TO
procure general summary Of all the imposltions
on the citizen. 1t is very evident that such
report. made with candor and intelligence. must
be productive Of great public advantage, BY fur
| nishng the means Of useful comparison, and
that it will be an interesting fiscal document,
which probably no other country possesses.-
But it is great error 10 imagine that The returns
| to be mace under this request Of MIR. Secretary
Livingston are to be received as the con 'luslve
| statement Of the American side Of the question,
in the controversy to which he has alluded
The letters Of Gen. Bernard and myself ,Uere
merely ans,Cers to statements made in France,
and publicly espoused by the French Ministry
at the Tribune, as proving that the cost OF Gov
| ernment is greater in our republic than 1t Is IN
their monarchy o. course we were bound to
reason Oh the proposition Of our adversarie,, and
this proposition does not at all include the expen
ses Of the cities, villages, ACCOMPLISHMENTS, can.
tons and communes Ut France
The ratio Of contribution for France, was OBJ.
, tanned BY simply dividing the amount Of THE eE.
In the article fO which our answers were 0rig-
nally directed, nothing was said even of the ex.
pensss of the National Guard. though the service
Of our militia was stadiousiy estimated and enor.
mously exaggerated. The apology for this ev.
deuiiy unfair omission. was pretence that the
institution of the National Guard is temporary,
and pretty frank ayowaI that it was the nten.
ton Of the existing powers to get rid Of it ~ AEON
as possible.
The Budget of France, however, includes
many heads of expenditure which are not con-
tanned either in our Federal Budget, or in that
of any State. The cost OF the clergy, for 10.
stance, is at the charge of the kingdom, as is
that Of q certain portion Of the roads. On the
other hand. there is no institution in France
which resembles our Stale governments. A fair
COM arison. therefore, Seepins in view the
proposition of our oppnnents required that there
should be an intelligent separation OF the differ
emit items Of our own expenditure, in such man.
ner as to produce those only which had parallels
in the case that had been made out for the other
keeping as close to official documents as my means
would allow. o. the clergy nothing could be
sand, but what was conjectural; but for all the
other i;ems had y good authorities as the case
needed. The result ~ before the world.
One Of the objects of raising this question IN
France, il. as am informed and believe, 10 i'm.
pair the influence Of Gen. Lafayette with his fel-
low citizens. Now it will probably be found
that, including the cost of church, roads, poor,
schools. and all l1ca charges, the citizens Of the
United States pay somewhere between twenty
aud thirty flames a head, Il think not much more
than twenty, and possibly not as much; and if
the government publishes such statement under
its authority. there is little doubt that it will be
seized upon as triumphant prouf that Gen. La
fayette, Gen. Bernard aud myself, who have ne.
YER pretended to give all these local charges,
have been materially wrong The controversy
has furnished, already, an eminent example OF
the total disregard Of candor with which it is the
taiics of our opponents to treat the subject
In my letter to Gen. Lafayette, the different
heads Of expenditure were Sc parated, that the
reader might choose his own items for compari
son. The result gave so much as the purely CT
vii expenditures of the country; 40 much as the
civil and military $50 much as civil & military. with
the cost Of poot; with poor and >chouls. &c. &C.,
and SO much az the sum total Of all the items
had enumerated. The results differed Of course
varying from abnut two francs head. to ab"ut
fourteen francs. Singular as it will appear,
this difference, accompanied BY the clearest
statements, was triumphantly quoted against me
a. 80 many contradictions in my own account! -
Experience of the nature Of the reasoning Of the
adversaries Of Gen. Lafayette. induces me to
point out in time, the probable use that will be
made of the local costs which are 10 ne included
in the returns requested BY the Secretary of
State. and to put the public on its guard against
the consequences.
have found but few Americans who appear
TO me to understand the subject 10 controversy;
most Of them have been thinking OF the local
faces of The country when there was no question
whatever Of these local charges. The inhsbi.
tan,s Of the American cities in particular. who
are sufficiently taxed no doubt. though not at all
to the degree that the Inhabitants Of most Euro
pean cities are taxed. Immediately speak Of the
amount Of the taxes they pay on this or that lot
or house. They might as we'll speak Of their vo-
Iuntary donations to the door, as to any coune.-
ion these city taxes have with the disputed punt
The charge. of the city Of Paris are not includ
! charges Of the city OF New York are Included