III. CHAP. abuses which we now require to abolish for the public good are such as affect the strong-those which are most 1787. vigilantly guarded, but whose roots are the deepest and branches the most extended. Such are the abuses which press upon the laborious and industrious classes-the abuses of pecuniary privileges, of exceptions from the common law, and all those exclusive rights which aggravate the burdens of one class of society by establishing an unjust exemption in favour of another. Let it not be said our resources are exhausted, and nothing remains to restore our finances. Gentlemen, our abuses remain ; and in these abuses, which we have a right to reclaim, will be found a mine of riches which will at once satisfy our wants, and remove a stain on our institutions."1 I Droz, i. 480, 481. Soul. vi. 132, 134. 75. Universal storm against Calonne on these proposals. No words can convey an idea of the universal storm of discontent which these unexpected disclosures and proposals excited not only among the Notables, to whom they were addressed, but the whole circles of Paris, to whom they were afterwards published. It was hard to say whether the nobles, the clergy, the philosophers, the courtiers, or the democrats, were most vehement in condemning the lately popular finance minister. Such was the clamour raised that it was absolutely stunning, and at once so vehement and universal, from the moment it commenced, that it was evident his projects must miscarry, and probably he himself be involved in their ruin. Yet his proposals were conceived in a noble spirit, founded in evident justice, supported by the King, in themselves safe, and perfectly adequate to relieve the state necessities. How, then, did it happen that measures so recommended should have excited so universal a spirit of resistance in the whole influential classes of France? Simply, because they were just and equal; because they pandered to no popular passions, and gratified no statesman's ambition; because the remedy they suggested for the public necessities was an equalisation of the social burdens, not an elevation of a new class to their direction; because they III. 1787. 1 Droz, i. tended only to save the country, not to make the fortunes CHAP. of any set of men in it. To those who are practically acquainted with the workings of human selfishness in all assemblies, aristocratic or democratic, these considerations 483. will appear perfectly adequate to explain the phenomenon.1 tion. But in addition to this fundamental principle, there 76. was a peculiar concurrence of causes which induced this Causes of this general extraordinary combination of all classes against the combina finance minister. That his proposal to equalise the social burdens, and levy taxation over the whole community, should excite the most vehement resistance in the privileged class was nothing surprising; it is the usual effect of human selfishness all the world over. But the extraordinary thing was, that it met with equal opposition from the popular leaders, who were contending for a class whom it went so directly to benefit. The secret cause of that circumstance was this,-Calonne's disclosures revealed the real sources of the public embarrassments they demonstrated that they were of very old standing; that the extravagance of the last few years had added very little to their amount; that the habit of contracting debt without providing for its interest was the real origin of the evil, and that Necker's famous compte rendu in 1781 was not only illusory, but deceptive. These disclosures thwarted the views of the whole liberal party in France. It was the great object of the popular leaders, and their numerous allies in literature, to represent the financial difficulties as entirely owing to the profusion of the court, the extravagance of the Queen, and the faults of the minister; and as having only grown up since the retirement of Necker and the philosophers in 1781. It may be conceived, therefore, what was their mortification when they saw it traced back to the wars and expenses of former reigns, and shown to have been brought to a climax by that very American contest which their own clamour had forced upon a reluctant govern CHAP. III. 1787. of the 77. Notables to elude the plan, and finance contests. ment. Necker, and his numerous supporters among the liberals, were indignant at the exposure made of a deficit of 46,000,000 francs in that very year when he had boasted of a surplus of ten millions. All were to the last degree disappointed at finding a remedy, and what was evidently an effectual remedy, suggested for the whole public difficulties-not, as they hoped, by a change of the ministry in power, or an infusion of popular principles into the general institutions, which might alter the class that was henceforward to rule, but by the homely and long-known method of putting their hands in their pockets to pay them. Thus, when traced to the bottom, it was the ambitious and interested views of all the classes in the state which thwarted this noble effort of Calonne and Louis, the last that could be made to extricate the nation from its embarrassments; and it was the selfishness of all that overthrew the monarchy. Calonne's plan, however, was so evidently founded on Pretences just principles, that the nobles and clergy among the Notables did not venture openly to resist it. They endeavoured, as the baseness of selfishness always does on similar occasions, to elude its effect; and indirectly, without appearing to contest its principles, to avoid their application. For this purpose, without denying the general principle, that taxation should be imposed equally on all, they had recourse to the preliminary plea that, before establishing such a maxim, they should examine whether no other means existed to repair the deficit, in order to make the extension of the land-tax as little burdensome as possible; and they insisted absolutely on two points: 1. That if the extension of the burden was determined on, its amount and duration should be previously fixed. 2. That the privileges of corporations and provinces should be maintained in the collection of it—a privilege which they hoped would enable them, in these subordinate assemblies, to evade the general imposition of the burden. The finance In CHAP. III. 1787. minister, who saw in these demands clear indications of a resolution to throw out the whole measure, spared no efforts both in public and in private to overcome the opposition. At his request a committee, consist- March 2. ing of six members from each of the four divisions of the Notables, met at the bureau of the Comte d'Artois, in order to endeavour to arrive at an accommodation; and in that committee he conjured them in the most pressing terms, if they would avert the uttermost calamities from the monarchy and themselves, to cooperate with the monarch in this last effort to extricate the government from its embarrassments. that debate, which was prolonged to a late hour of the night, Calonne displayed remarkable talents, and that earnestness of manner which always springs from honesty and elevation of purpose. But it was all in vain. He spoke to men who were deaf to every consideration of reason, justice, or patriotism; who were intent only on maintaining their selfish interests; and many of whom were in secret overjoyed at the disclosure made of the difficulties of the treasury, from the hope that it might overturn the ministry and place themselves in their stead. All Necker's friends belonged to this latter class; and he himself immediately commenced a furious attack on the finance minister's exposure of his compte rendu, to which Calonne as warmly replied. From this acrimonious contention the public Hist. Parl. drew the conclusion, that the deficit was in all probability i. 222. really greater than either of the finance ministers was 483, 487. willing to admit; and, by the disclosures which came 154, 160. out in the heat of the controversy, the credit of the crown was seriously impaired.1 Vergennes died of a lingering illness, on the 13th February 1787; and his death was an incalculable calamity to France at this period, for he was much esteemed by the Notables-and his manners were so conciliatory that if any one could have mediated with Droz, i. Soul. vi. CHAP. success on this occasion, between the crown and that powerful body, it was himself. Louis with profound 1787. grief attended the funeral of a friend to whom he was sincerely attached; and on leaving the grave he said, Vergennes, with tears in his eyes, "How happy should I be to 78. Death of and con tinued resistance of the Notables. repose in peace beside you!" The difficulties of the monarch were greatly increased by this bereavement. The Count de Montmorin, who was chosen to succeed him, an upright and honourable man, had not vigour or ability to support the crown in the contest in which it was now engaged, and the whole weight of the struggle consequently fell on Calonne. He now had recourse to the royal authority; and Louis formally announced to the Notables, that his intention was that they should deliberate, not on the principle of taxation, but the form in which it should be paid. They answered that a payment in money would be least burdensome, but renewed the demand for a full statement of the public accounts. Some talked of a statesgeneral among them were the Archbishop of Artois, the Marquis Lafayette, and Crébillon, procureur-general of the parliament of Aix. Addressing the Comte d'Artois, who was in the chair, he said, "Your royal highness will permit me to say, that there is no existing authority which can impose the land-tax in the manner proposed neither this assembly, august as it 155, 157. is, nor the parliament, nor the states of particular provinces. The States-general alone have that power."1 1 Droz, i. 487, 488. Soul. vi. 79. at length de Brienne appointed minister. Meanwhile the contest between Necker and Calonne, Calonne is in regard to the finance accounts, continued with such overthrown, acrimony, that the King, deeming the dispute discreditand Lomenie able to the crown, banished the former twenty leagues from Paris, and forbade the latter to publish any thing with his name-a prohibition which did not prevent him from giving a pamphlet on the public accounts to the world anonymously, though every one knew it came from the pen of the finance minister. During this dis April 11. |