The sun., 1916-09-03

total expenditures were fully 1000, 00o.-
600 livres. Much Information viii be
found in his "Histoire Financ!erc de IA
France depuis l1l5." and IN Comets
Les Causes Financieres de Ia Revolu-
ton Franchise" Iiske in his Critical
Period" puts the expenditure e France
at l.i00,0 900. 900 francs. 1rcvelyan
states the following in a note 10 his
American Revolution: at was cal
cu.atcd tina; between the years IT'S
and 1883 the Mar with England cost
thu French treasury $4,000 ,0O0. II
was the main cause OF those financial
difficulties which led Immediately UP TO
the Revolution OF 1883" This would
lie equivalent TO 100, 900. 900 llyres
Cfrancsp. or s2io.o o0. 00O.at a time when
the purchasing power OF money was
very much greater than IN tho TWEEN
t!eth century. Indeed IT Is probably
not an eNasgeration TO Say that the
purchasing power OF gold was then
nearly three times what It Is IN our
day.
In an introduction to Perkinss
"f'rance in tho American Revolution"
Ambassador Jusserand wrote IN 1911
Is follows:
"Ruinous II was indeed. costing the
French treasury SIZE. 900. 900: but pub
lie opinion remained faithful to the
struggling States. The people groaned
under the weight OF taxation. but
grumbled at the expense Of such
a cause. Peace came. France kept her
word: she did not try to recover any
OF her possessions On the American
continent: h made n pro-.American
peace. not al anti-English one. Pubic
opinion again was fully satisfied; what
It wanted had been secured; there were
no protests against tho moderation
shown toward the adversary: the joy
was universal. Years after the war
the same pro-American feelings which
had apparently taken deep root still
prevailed. as shown by the French Ma
tional Assernbly's adJournlng ut tho
news OF the death Of Franklin; the
French army going into mourning at
the death Of Washington. and the
glowing culogies Of the new republic
still sent home by Its French visitors"
NJ. J~usserand In II note refers to
Perkins, work as his authority for the
figure "$772. 900. 00O.' but lie did not
Independently verify Perkins's figures
In view OF the latter's reputation for
accuracy. Perkins. however. did not
a whether II was dollars or livres.
: After corresponding with Mr.. Per-
kius's widow II now seems to me
probable that Mr.. Perkins meant livrcs
and not dollars. Tho work was pub
lished after Mr.. Perkins's death. In
a note found among his papers Is
Tho following: "Chas. Gomel. Les
Dcrniers Controleurs Opp. 86-3T.
\ pamphlet appearing IN July. 1852.
calculated that the amount which
American independence had cost down
to that time was 773 millions and
that commercial relations had not be-
come moro important" The expenses
Of tho year l7so. probably part OF
those OF 1881. aud those which mus,
have accrued In 1888. could not have
been known by July. 1852.
In considering the inevitable eS-
expense assumed by France II must be
borne in mind that the burden was not
confined to sending fleets ana armies
to America, the West Indies and the
Floridas. but required a very costly
wal at sea all oversthe world with
the greatest maritime power Of his.
tory; It nccessitated the protection
Of French ports and dependencies by
fleets and armies. and II called foi
campaigns not only In America but
also In Europe. Africa ana Asia The
great naval victory Of Suffren wal
won in Asia 1t IL therefore quite
possible. ~ not probable. that the