utional　monarchy　to　complete　the　comparison。
  United　States　　　　　Treasury　Department　Messenger　。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。　　　700　Clerk　with　lowest　salary　。。。。。。。。。。。。。　　1；000　Clerk　with　highest　salary　。。。。。。。。。。。。　　1；600　Chief　Clerk　。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。　　2；000　Secretary　of　State　。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。　　6；000　The　President　。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。　25；000
  France　Ministere　des　Finances　Hussier　。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。　1；500　fr。　Clerk　with　lowest　salary；　　1；000　to　1；800　fr。　Clerk　with　highest　salary　　3；200　to　8；600　fr。　Secretaire…general　。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。20；000　fr。　The　Minister　。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。80；000　fr。　The　King　。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。12；000；000　fr。
  I　have　perhaps　done　wrong　in　selecting　France　as　my　standard　of　comparison。　　In　France　the　democratic　tendencies　of　the　nation　exercise　an　ever…increasing　influence　upon　the　Government；　and　the　Chambers　show　a　disposition　to　raise　the　low　salaries　and　to　lower　the　principal　ones。　　Thus；　the　Minister　of　Finance；　who　received　160；000　fr。　under　the　Empire；　receives　80；000　fr。　in　1835：　the　Directeurs…generaux　of　Finance；　who　then　received　50；000　fr。　now　receive　only　20；000　fr。　　＇This　comparison　is　based　on　the　state　of　things　existing　in　France　and　the　United　States　in　1831。　　It　has　since　materially　altered　in　both　countries；　but　not　so　much　as　to　impugn　the　truth　of　the　author's　observation。＇＇
  Under　the　rule　of　an　aristocracy　it　frequently　happens；　on　the　contrary；　that　whilst　the　high　officers　are　receiving　munificent　salaries；　the　inferior　ones　have　not　more　than　enough　to　procure　the　necessaries　of　life。　　The　reason　of　this　fact　is　easily　discoverable　from　causes　very　analogous　to　those　to　which　I　have　just　alluded。　　If　a　democracy　is　unable　to　conceive　the　pleasures　of　the　rich　or　to　witness　them　without　envy；　an　aristocracy　is　slow　to　understand；　or；　to　speak　more　correctly；　is　unacquainted　with；　the　privations　of　the　poor。　　The　poor　man　is　not　（if　we　use　the　term　aright）　the　fellow　of　the　rich　one；　but　he　is　a　being　of　another　species。　　An　aristocracy　is　therefore　apt　to　care　but　little　for　the　fate　of　its　subordinate　agents；　and　their　salaries　are　only　raised　when　they　refuse　to　perform　their　service　for　too　scanty　a　remuneration。
  It　is　the　parsimonious　conduct　of　democracy　towards　its　principal　officers　which　has　countenanced　a　supposition　of　far　more　economical　propensities　than　any　which　it　really　possesses。　　It　is　true　that　it　scarcely　allows　the　means　of　honorable　subsistence　to　the　individuals　who　conduct　its　affairs；　but　enormous　sums　are　lavished　to　meet　the　exigencies　or　to　facilitate　the　enjoyments　of　the　people。　*j　The　money　raised　by　taxation　may　be　better　employed；　but　it　is　not　saved。　　In　general；　democracy　gives　largely　to　the　community；　and　very　sparingly　to　those　who　govern　it。　　The　reverse　is　the　case　in　aristocratic　countries；　where　the　money　of　the　State　is　expended　to　the　profit　of　the　persons　who　are　at　the　head　of　affairs。
  ＇Footnote　j：　See　the　American　budgets　for　the　cost　of　indigent　citizens　and　gratuitous　instruction。　　In　1831　250；000　were　spent　in　the　State　of　New　York　for　the　maintenance　of　the　poor；　and　at　least　1；000；000　were　devoted　to　gratuitous　instruction。　　（William's　〃New　York　Annual　Register；〃　1832；　pp。　205　and　243。）　The　State　of　New　York　contained　only　1；900；000　inhabitants　in　the　year　1830；　which　is　not　more　than　double　the　amount　of　population　in　the　Department　du　Nord　in　France。＇
  Difficulty　of　Distinguishing　The　Causes　Which　Contribute　To　The　Economy　Of　The　American　Government
  We　are　liable　to　frequent　errors　in　the　research　of　those　facts　which　exercise　a　serious　influence　upon　the　fate　of　mankind；　since　nothing　is　more　difficult　than　to　appreciate　their　real　value。　　One　people　is　naturally　inconsistent　and　enthusiastic；　another　is　sober　and　calculating；　and　these　characteristics　originate　in　their　physical　constitution　or　in　remote　causes　with　which　we　are　unacquainted。
  These　are　nations　which　are　fond　of　parade　and　the　bustle　of　festivity；　and　which　do　not　regret　the　costly　gaieties　of　an　hour。　　Others；　on　the　contrary；　are　attached　to　more　retiring　pleasures；　and　seem　almost　ashamed　of　appearing　to　be　pleased。　　In　some　countries　the　highest　value　is　set　upon　the　beauty　of　public　edifices；　in　others　the　productions　of　art　are　treated　with　indifference；　and　everything　which　is　unproductive　is　looked　down　upon　with　contempt。　　In　some　renown；　in　others　money；　is　the　ruling　passion。
  Independently　of　the　laws；　all　these　causes　concur　to　exercise　a　very　powerful　influence　upon　the　conduct　of　the　finances　of　the　State。　　If　the　Americans　never　spend　the　money　of　the　people　in　galas；　it　is　not　only　because　the　imposition　of　taxes　is　under　the　control　of　the　people；　but　because　the　people　takes　no　delight　in　public　rejoicings。　　If　they　repudiate　all　ornament　from　their　architecture；　and　set　no　store　on　any　but　the　more　practical　and　homely　advantages；　it　is　not　only　because　they　live　under　democratic　institutions；　but　because　they　are　a　commercial　nation。　　The　habits　of　private　life　are　continued　in　public；　and　we　ought　carefully　to　distinguish　that　economy　which　depends　upon　their　institutions　from　that　which　is　the　natural　result　of　their　manners　and　customs。
  Whether　The　Expenditure　Of　The　United　States　Can　Be　Compared　To　That　Of　France
  Two　points　to　be　established　in　order　to　estimate　the　extent　of　the　public　charges；　viz。；　the　national　wealth　and　the　rate　of　taxation　…　The　wealth　and　the　charges　of　France　not　accurately　known　…　Why　the　wealth　and　charges　of　the　Union　cannot　be　accurately　known　…　Researches　of　the　author　with　a　view　to　discover　the　amount　of　taxation　of　Pennsylvania　…　General　symptoms　which　may　serve　to　indicate　the　amount　of　the　public　charges　in　a　given　nation　…　Result　of　this　investigation　for　the　Union。
  Many　attempts　have　recently　been　made　in　France　to　compare　the　public　expenditure　of　that　country　with　the　expenditure　of　the　United　States；　all　these　attempts　have；　however；　been　unattended　by　success；　and　a　few　words　will　suffice　to　show　that　they　could　not　have　had　a　satisfactory　result。
  In　order　to　estimate　the　amount　of　the　public　charges　of　a　people　two　preliminaries　are　indispensable：　it　is　necessary；　in　the　first　place；　to　know　the　wealth　of　that　people；　and　in　the　second；　to　learn　what　portion　of　that　wealth　is　devoted　to　the　expenditure　of　the　State。　　To　show　the　amount　of　taxation　without　showing　the　resources　which　are　destined　to　meet　the　demand；　is　to　undertake　a　futile　labor；　for　it　is　not　the　expenditure；　but　the　relation　of　the　expenditure　to　the　revenue；　which　it　is　desirable　to　know。
  The　same　rate　of　taxation　which　may　easily　be　supported　by　a　wealthy　contributor　will　reduce　a　poor　one　to　extreme　misery。　　The　wealth　of　nations　is　composed　of　several　distinct　elements；　of　which　population　is　the　first；　real　property　the　second；　and　personal　property　the　third。　　The　first　of　these　three　elements　may　be　discovered　without　difficulty。　　Amongst　civilized　nations　it　is　easy　to　obtain　an　accurate　census　of　the　inhabitants；　but　the　two　others　cannot　be　determined　with　so　much　facility。　　It　is　difficult　to　take　an　exact　account　of　all　the　lands　in　a　country　which　are　under　cultivation；　with　their　natural　or　their　acquired　value；　and　it　is　still　more　impossible　to　estimate　the　entire　personal　property　which　is　at　the　disposal　of　a　nation；　and　which　eludes　the　strictest　analysis　by　the　diversity　and　the　number　of　shapes　under　which　it　may　occur。　　And；　indeed；　we　find　that　the　most　ancient　civilized　nations　of　Europe；　including　even　those　in　which　the　administration　is　most　central；　have　not　succeeded；　as　yet；　in　determining　the　exact　condition　of　their　wealth。
  In　America　the　attempt　has　never　been　made；　for　how　would　such　an　investigation　be　possible　in　a　country　where　society　has　not　yet　settled　into　habits　of　regularity　and　tranquillity；　where　the　national　Government　is　not　assisted　by　a　multiple　of　agents　whose　exertions　it　can　command　and　direct　to　one　sole　end；　and　where　statistics　are　not　studied；　because　no　one　is　able　to　collect　the　necessary　documents；　or　to　find　time　to　peruse　them？　　Thus　the　primary　elements　of　the　calculations　which　have　been　made　in　France　cannot　be　obtained　in　the　Union；　the　relative　wealth　of　the　two　countries　is　unknown；　the　property　of　the　former　is　not　accurately　determined；　and　no　means　exist　of　computing　that　of　the　latter。
  I　consent；　therefore；　for　the　sake　of　the　discussion；　to　abandon　this　necessary　term　of　the　comparison；　and　I　confine　myself　to　a　computation　of　the　actual　amount　of　taxation；　without　investigating　the　relation　which　subsists　between　the　taxation　and　the　revenue。　　But　the　reader　will　perceive　that　my　task　has　not　been　facilitated　by　the　limits　which　I　here　lay　down　for　my　researches。
  It　cannot　be　doubted　that　the　central　administration　of　France；　assisted　by　all　the　public　officers　who　are　at　its　disposal；　might　determine　with　exactitude　the　amount　of　the　direct　and　indirect　taxes　levied　upon　the　citizens。　　But　this　investigation；　which　no　private　individual　can　undertake；　has　not　hitherto　been　completed　by　the　French　Government；　or；　at　least；　its　results　have　not　been　made　public。　　We　are　acquainted