Year: 1871

to say that the greatest blunder he ever COM
his financial minister. This was the great
| geometer and astronomer, Laplace; but
although no one admired his genius as scien-
tific man more than the Emperor, he allowed
him to retain his portfolio only just six weeks.
We will spare Mr.. Boutwell, the ridicule of
comparing his claims to distinction to those of
the author of the s'Mechanique Celeste" and
so many other noble works. There is one
point, however, in which it must be admitted
our Secretary of the Treasury resembles the
astronomer; for one Of the chief reasons OF
Napoleon for discarding the latter was that, as
minister, che never seized any question
under its veritable point of view;" another
was that che carried the spirit of the infinitely
little into all his administrative plans"


No two expressions could describe Mr..
Boutwell, more faithfully, so far as they go.
But in order that full justice should be done to
all parties, perhaps we should remind our
readers that our Secretary of the Treasury has
also produced some ''works." He is the
author of ''Manual of United States Tax Sys-
tem," and Taxpayers Manual" Since one
of these was printed, if not published, in 1868,
| and the other In 1866, it may be that
! the President had right to infer from them
that the author was political economist. 1t
is true that in their grammar, as well as in
their logic, both are very much like those
compositions" read at our country colleges
during the warm weather, as evidence that the
education of their authors, or supposed
authors, is FINISHED"


There is one thing, however, which might
easily enough have been inferred from the


manuals" alluded to-namely, that the author
was a warm admirer Of taxation, especially in
its heavier forms, and while he was more or
less exempt himself from its operation, and
that he is still of the same way OF thinking, is
| but too well known to our taxpayers of all
classes and parties. The tenacity with which
! he clings to the one idea Of tax, tax, would
| be amusing were it not that its ruinous indu-
| ence is becoming more and more apparent
| from day to day, even to the most thought
less AS it is Mr.. Boutwells financial system
| is an object of derision, from its oppressive
ness, in every country in Europe; itpossesses,
| as many of our readers are aware, the unen-
viable distinction of elicting the jibes and
| jeers even Of the organs Of those governments
which do not pretend to recognize the principle
of representation as having anything to do
with taxation.


We need hardly say at this time that we had
never much faith in the qualifications of Mr..
| Boutwell, for the position he occupies but we
hoped that he would either improve or be
removed before long. Actuated by this feel
ing, we gave him as much encouragement as
possible; but it is well known that to
encourage little minds is to render them
arrogant and overbearing as we'll as vain, and
Mr.. Boutwell, has proved no exception to the
rule. Like other ambitious politicians whom
we have sometimes decorated with the lions
skin-partly in order to stimulate them to do
good in their sphere and partly in order to
afford our readers little sport-he has made
more progress in Stiffness than in wisdom.
But as those who expect little cannot be much
disappointed, SO all we regret in the present
case is that the worst fears we entertained
for the country when Mr.. Boutwell, got charge
| of the Treasury Department have been but too
| fully realized


Nor need we make secret any longer
of the causes of those unfavorable mis-
givings. When we heard Of his appointment
we could not help remembering that we never
knew a successful financial minister who was
not statesman; we had not forgotten that
| Pitt and Fox Sir Robert Peel and Lord
| Castlereagh, Mr.. Disraeli and Mr.. Gladstone
had each in turn charge Of the British
exchequer, either directly or indirectly or
that it was their broad aud enlightened views
in relation to the public finances that estab-
lished their reputation as statesmen. AT the
same time we bore in mind Sully and
Richeleu, Mazarin and Talleyrand. True, we
took into account that in this country the
corresponding Office was regarded in some
what different light, as one that required only
second or third rate abilities; although Chase
and some others had in general performed
their duties so ably as to be justly entitled to be
ranked as statesmen. Then, when we came
to compare Mr.. Boutwell, with any of these
with Englishman, Frenchman or American
| how Immensely wide was the gull!


| And now that we have had trial of him
for years, how much alteration have we had
reason to make in our original estimate? OF
all the statesmen with whose ideas on
political economy we are acquainted there is
but one whose 'policy" resembles Mr.. Bout
wells, and we presume we need hardly
inform the more intelligent class of our
readers that that one is Nicholas Machiaveli.
We do not, indeed, mean to compare
the brain Of our Secretary of the
Treasury to that Of the Secretary of the
Florentine republic, for we feel that
we can be patriotic enough without traducing
the illustrious dead. But Machiavel has
written in his poverty and adversity well