Author's Notes to Parts I and II, 1

1 The judges' chief and consistent maxim is: the greater the truth, the greater the libel.

2 Since writing the above, I have noticed two other passages in Mr. Burke's pamphlet that name the Bastille, though in the same manner. In one he introduces it in a rather obscure question: "Will any ministers who now serve such a king, with but a decent appearance of respect, cordially obey the orders of those whom but the other day, in his name, they had committed to the Bastille?" In the other he treats its capture as evidence of guilt on the part of the French guards who helped demolish it. "They have not," he says, "forgot the taking the king's castles at Paris." This is Mr. Burke, who claims to write about constitutional freedom.

3 I can assert this on good authority: I heard it personally from M. de la Fayette, with whom I maintained a friendship for fourteen years.

4 An account of the expedition to Versailles appears in No. 13 of the Revolution de Paris, covering the events of the 3rd to the 10th of October, 1789.

5 In some parts of the country, when two travelers have only one horse—which, like the national purse, cannot carry both—it is customary for one to mount and ride two or three miles ahead, tie the horse to a gate, and walk on. When the second traveler arrives, he takes the horse, rides a mile or two past his companion, and ties it up again. Thus they proceed: ride and tie.

6 The word he used was renvoye, dismissed or sent away.

7 When extraordinary events occur in a country, anyone gifted in observation and inquiry naturally asks what caused them. Manchester, Birmingham, and Sheffield are England's principal centers of manufacturing. How did this come about? A little observation supplies the answer. The leading inhabitants, and the majority of people in those places, do not belong to what England calls the church established by law. They, or their fathers—for this happened only a few years ago—escaped the persecution of the chartered towns, where the test laws operate with particular force, and made those places a kind of refuge for themselves. It was then the only refuge available, since the rest of Europe was worse. But circumstances are changing. France and America welcome all who come and admit them to the full rights of citizenship. Policy and self-interest will therefore dictate to England, perhaps too late, what reason and justice could not. Manufacturers are departing and establishing themselves elsewhere. A large cotton factory is now being built in Passey, three miles from Paris, and several have already been built in America. Soon after the bill repealing the test law was rejected, one of England's wealthiest manufacturers said within my hearing, "England, Sir, is not a country for a dissenter to live in—we must go to France." These are facts, and both sides deserve to hear them. It is chiefly dissenters who have brought English manufacturing to its present height, and these same men have the power to take it away. Though manufacturing would continue in those English towns afterward, their foreign market would be lost. The London Gazette frequently prints extracts from acts intended to prevent machinery and people, so far as legislation can restrain people, from leaving the country. These acts suggest that the harmful effects of the test laws and the established church are beginning to arouse suspicion; but force can never provide the remedy that reason would provide. Within less than a century, the unrepresented people of England, of every denomination and at least an hundred times more numerous than the represented, may come to feel the need for a constitution. All these questions will then come properly before them.

8 When the English minister, Mr. Pitt, next speaks of French finances in the English Parliament, he would do well to cite this example.

9 Speaking on this subject, Mr. Burke—and I must tell him that he knows very little about French affairs—says, "The first thing that struck me in calling the States-General, was a great departure from the ancient course"; and shortly afterward, "From the moment I read the list, I saw distinctly, and very nearly as it has happened, all that was to follow." Mr. Burke certainly did not foresee all that followed. I tried to impress upon him, both before and after the States-General assembled, that there would be a revolution; but I could not make him see or believe it. How he could distinctly see every part while the whole remained invisible to him is beyond my understanding. As for his "departure from the ancient course," the remark is weak in itself and reveals his ignorance of the circumstances. The departure was necessary because experience had shown the old procedure to be bad. The States-General of 1614 was called at the beginning of the civil war during the minority of Louis XIII.; but because its members were arranged by orders, they aggravated the disorder they had been summoned to settle. The author of L'Intrigue du Cabinet (Intrigue of the Cabinet), writing before anyone contemplated a revolution in France, says of the States-General of 1614: "They held the public in suspense five months; and by the questions agitated therein, and the heat with which they were put, it appears that the great (les grands) thought more to satisfy their particular passions, than to procure the goods of the nation; and the whole time passed away in altercations, ceremonies and parade."—L'Intrigue du Cabinet, vol. i. p. 329.

10 One idea, if rightly understood in either its legal or religious sense, would prevent any person, body of persons, or government from going astray on religion. Before human institutions of government existed, there was, if I may call it so, a compact between God and humanity from the beginning of time. No human law or authority can change an individual's relation to his Maker; therefore the religious devotion that forms part of this compact cannot even be made a subject of human legislation. All laws must conform to the compact that preceded them, rather than presume to make that compact conform to laws that are both human and later in origin. When human beings first looked around and recognized themselves as creatures who had not made themselves, in a world prepared to receive them, their first act must have been devotion. Devotion must remain sacred to every individual, in whatever form seems right to him; governments do harm by interfering.

11 See this work, Part I starting at line number 254.—N.B. Since the capture of the Bastille, the events have been made public; but the matters recorded in this account took place before that time, and some, as is easily seen, can be known to very few people.

12 See "Estimate of the Comparative Strength of Great Britain," by G. Chalmers.

13 See "Administration of the Finances of France," vol. iii, by M. Neckar.

14 "Administration of the Finances of France," vol. iii.

15 Whether English commerce fails to bring in money, or the government sends it away after it arrives, the parties involved can best explain. Neither, however, can deny that there is a deficiency. While Dr. Price, Mr. Eden (now Auckland), Mr. Chalmers, and others debated whether England held more or less money than at the Revolution, they overlooked the fact that since the Revolution at least four hundred millions sterling must have been brought into Europe. To keep pace with Europe, England's stock of money ought therefore to have been at least four times what it was at the Revolution. What England now does with paper money she could have done with actual money, had gold and silver entered the country in their proper proportion or not been sent away. She is trying to restore with paper the balance she lost in coin. The gold and silver delivered each year to Spain and Portugal by the register ships certainly do not remain there. Taking half the value as gold and half as silver, the total is about four hundred tons annually. The number of ships and galleons engaged in bringing these metals from South America to Portugal and Spain is itself sufficient evidence of the quantity, without recourse to the registers.

As England is now situated, her stock of money cannot grow. Heavy taxes diminish not only individuals' property but the nation's monetary capital, because they encourage smuggling, which can be carried on only with gold and silver. The British government's policies toward the inland powers of Germany and the Continent have made enemies of all the maritime powers, compelling it to maintain a large navy. Yet although the ships are built in England, their naval stores must be bought abroad, largely from countries that require payment in gold and silver. Misleading rumors have been spread in England to encourage belief that money is abundant, including the claim that French refugees bring in great quantities. The notion is absurd. Most of the money in France is silver, and moving one million sterling in silver would require more than twenty of the largest broad-wheeled wagons, each drawn by ten horses. Can we suppose that a few people secretly fleeing on horseback or in post chaises, passing through French customs and crossing the sea, could carry even enough for their own expenses?

When people speak of millions in money, they should remember that sums of that size accumulate within a country only gradually, over a long stretch of time. Even the most frugal policy England could now adopt would not, within a century, restore the balance of money she has lost since the Hanoverian succession began. She is seventy millions behind France and must lag considerably behind every other country in Europe as well: the English mint's returns show no increase in money, while the registers of Lisbon and Cadiz show an increase across Europe of between three and four hundred millions sterling.

16 The part of America generally called New England, including New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, is populated chiefly by descendants of English people. In the state of New York about half the inhabitants are Dutch, and the rest English, Scottish, and Irish. New Jersey has a mixture of English and Dutch inhabitants, with some Scottish and Irish. In Pennsylvania about one third are English, another third German, and the remainder Scottish and Irish, with some Swedes. The states farther south have a larger proportion of English inhabitants than the middle states, but all are mixed. Besides those already named, a considerable number are French, and a few come from every European nation on the coast. Presbyterians are the largest religious denomination, but no sect is established above the others, and everyone is equally a citizen.

17 For an account of aristocracy's character, see Rights of Man, Part I, starting at line number 1457.

18 France's total assessed taxes for the present year amount to three hundred millions of francs, or twelve millions and a half sterling. Incidental taxes are estimated at three millions more, making fifteen millions and a half altogether: among twenty-four million people, that comes to not quite thirteen shillings a head. Since the revolution, France has reduced her taxes by nearly nine millions sterling a year. Before the revolution, the city of Paris levied a duty of more than thirty percent on every article brought into the city. Collected at the city gates, this tax was removed on the first of last May, and the gates were taken down.

1 The judges' consistent guiding rule is that the truer a statement is, the more seriously they treat it as libel.

2 Since writing the passage above, I have found two other places where Mr. Burke mentions the Bastille in his pamphlet. He treats it in much the same way. In one, he raises a rather obscure question: "Will ministers who now serve a king with at least an appearance of respect willingly obey orders from people whom, just the other day, they had sent to the Bastille in his name?" In the other, he mentions its capture as if the French guards who helped tear it down were guilty of a crime. "They have not," he says, "forgot the taking of the king's castles at Paris." This is the Mr. Burke who claims to write about constitutional freedom.

3 I can state this with confidence because M. de la Fayette told me himself. I was his friend for fourteen years.

4 An account of the expedition to Versailles appears in No. 13 of the Revolution de Paris, which covers events from the 3rd to the 10th of October, 1789.

5 In some parts of the country, when two travelers have only one horse, which, like the national purse, cannot carry both at once, they use this method. One rides two or three miles ahead, ties the horse to a gate, and walks on. The second arrives, mounts, rides a mile or two beyond his companion, and ties the horse again. They repeat this process, known as "ride and tie."

6 The word he used was renvoye, meaning dismissed or sent away.

7 When unusual things happen in a country, an observant and inquisitive person naturally asks why. Manchester, Birmingham, and Sheffield are the chief manufacturing centers in England. Why did manufacturing grow there? A little observation explains it. Most of the important residents, and most residents generally, do not belong to what England calls the church established by law. They, or their fathers—for this happened only a few years ago—left the chartered towns to escape persecution, especially the test laws enforced there. They found something like a refuge in those other places. It was the only refuge available then, because the rest of Europe was worse. But things are changing. France and America welcome newcomers and give them full rights of citizenship. England may therefore be driven by self-interest and policy, perhaps too late, to do what reason and justice could not make it do. Manufacturers are leaving England and setting up elsewhere. A large cotton factory is now being built at Passey, three miles from Paris, and several have already been built in America. Soon after the bill to repeal the test law was rejected, one of England's richest manufacturers said in my hearing, "England, Sir, is no country for a dissenter to live in. We must go to France." These things are true, and both sides deserve to be told. Dissenters have been chiefly responsible for bringing English manufacturing to its present level, and those same people can take it abroad. Manufacturing may continue in its old locations, but the foreign market will be lost. The London Gazette often prints extracts from acts intended to stop machines and, as far as the law can reach them, people from leaving the country. This suggests that people are beginning to suspect the harmful effects of test laws and the established church. But force can never do the work of reason. Within less than a century, the unrepresented people of England, of every denomination, who outnumber the represented by at least a hundred to one, may begin to see the need for a constitution. Then all these matters will properly come before them.

8 The next time the English minister, Mr. Pitt, discusses French finances in the English Parliament, he should mention this example.

9 Speaking of this matter, Mr. Burke says, "The first thing that struck me about calling the States-General was a great break from the old practice." I must tell him that he knows very little about French affairs. Soon afterward he says, "As soon as I read the list, I clearly saw everything that would follow, almost exactly as it happened." Mr. Burke certainly did not see everything that would follow. I tried, both before and after the States-General met, to convince him that there would be a revolution. I could neither make him see it nor make him believe it. How could he have clearly seen all the parts when he could not see the whole? I cannot understand it. As for the "break from the old practice," the remark is weak in itself and shows his ignorance of the circumstances. Experience showed that the old practice was bad, so a change was necessary. The States-General of 1614 met at the beginning of a civil war, when Louis XIII. was still a minor. But because its members were organized into separate orders, it increased the disorder it was called to resolve. The author of L'Intrigue du Cabinet (Intrigue of the Cabinet) wrote before anyone expected a revolution in France. Speaking of the States-General of 1614, he says, "They kept the public waiting for five months. The questions debated and the passion with which they were argued show that the great (les grands) cared more about satisfying their private desires than about securing the nation's good. The entire time was spent in quarrels, ceremonies, and display." L'Intrigue du Cabinet, vol. i. p. 329.

10 One idea, properly understood in legal or religious terms, can keep any person, group, or government from going wrong about religion. Before human governments existed, there was, so to speak, an agreement between God and humanity from the beginning of time. No human law or authority can change an individual's relationship to the Creator. Religious devotion is part of that agreement, so it cannot even be made a subject of human law. Laws must comply with this earlier agreement. They must not claim that the agreement has to comply with them: they were made by people and came later. When a person first looked around, saw that he had not created himself, and saw a world prepared for him, his first act must have been devotion. Every individual must always be free to practice devotion as he thinks right. Governments do harm when they interfere.

11 See this work, Part I starting at line number 254. Since the capture of the Bastille, accounts of these events have been published. But what this account records happened before then, and some of it, as is easy to see, can be known to very few people.

12 See "Estimate of the Comparative Strength of Great Britain," by G. Chalmers.

13 See "Administration of the Finances of France," vol. iii, by M. Neckar.

14 "Administration of the Finances of France," vol. iii.

15 Those concerned can best explain whether English trade fails to bring money into the country or the government sends it out afterward. Neither side, though, can deny the shortage. Dr. Price, Mr. Eden (now Auckland), Mr. Chalmers, and others debated whether England had more or less money than it had at the Revolution. They overlooked the fact that, since the Revolution, at least four hundred millions sterling must have entered Europe. For England to have kept pace with Europe, its supply of money should therefore have grown to at least four times what it had been at the Revolution. England is now trying to do with paper money what it could have done with real money if gold and silver had entered the country in the right proportion or had not been sent away. It is trying to replace with paper the balance of money it has lost. The gold and silver brought each year to Spain and Portugal by the registered ships certainly do not stay there. If we assume half the value is in gold and half in silver, the metals amount to about four hundred tons a year. The number of ships and galleons carrying them from South America to Portugal and Spain is enough by itself to establish the quantity, without consulting the registers.

In its present position, England cannot increase its money supply. High taxes reduce not only individuals' property but also the nation's stock of money. They encourage smuggling, which can be carried on only with gold and silver. Through its policies toward the inland powers of Germany and the Continent, the British government has made enemies of all the maritime powers. It therefore has to maintain a large navy. Though its ships are built in England, their supplies must be bought abroad, largely from countries that must be paid in gold and silver. Misleading rumors have circulated in England to make people think it has more money. One says that French refugees have brought great sums. The idea is ridiculous. Most money in France is silver. It would take more than twenty of the largest broad-wheel wagons, each pulled by ten horses, to carry one million sterling in silver. Can anyone suppose that a few people fleeing secretly on horseback or in post-chaises, having to pass French customs and cross the sea, could bring even enough to pay their own expenses?

When people speak of millions in money, they should remember that such sums build up in a country only slowly, over a long time. Even the most economical policy England could adopt now would not recover in a century the balance of money it has lost since the beginning of the Hanoverian succession. England is seventy millions behind France and must be substantially behind every other country in Europe. The returns from the English mint show no increase in money, while the registers at Lisbon and Cadiz show an increase in Europe of between three and four hundred millions sterling.

16 The part of America generally called New-England, including New-Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode-Island, and Connecticut, is populated chiefly by descendants of English people. About half the people in the state of New-York are Dutch; the rest are English, Scotch, and Irish. New-jersey has a mix of English and Dutch people, with some Scotch and Irish. About one third of Pennsylvania's people are English, another third German, and the rest Scotch and Irish, with some Swedes. The southern states have a higher share of English people than the middle states, but they also have mixed populations. Beyond those already listed, there are substantial numbers of French people, and small numbers from every European nation, along the coast. Presbyterians are the largest religious denomination. But no sect is established over another, and everyone has equal citizenship.

17 For a description of aristocracy, see Rights of Man, Part I, starting at line number 1457.

18 France's total assessed taxes for the present year are three hundred millions of francs, or twelve and a half millions sterling. Incidental taxes are estimated at three millions, bringing the total to fifteen and a half millions. Spread among twenty-four million people, this is not quite thirteen shillings per person. Since the revolution, France has cut its annual taxes by nearly nine millions sterling. Before the revolution, Paris collected a duty of more than thirty per cent on everything brought into the city. The duty was collected at the city gates. It was abolished on the first of last May, and the gates were taken down.