publifh? wherefore this fury againft the funding fyftem, and this violence for peace? they will fay with Lord Bacon, whom you are ftudious to quote, "That in dealing with cunning perfons, we muft ever confider their ends, to interpret their speeches."

I haftened, upon this information, to peruse your letter, expecting to be inftructed by your knowledge, and improved by your elegance. I foon perceived, that you had mentioned my ESTIMATE, as a masterly work, though you do not, in your practice, pay much regard to its facts, or yield, in your reafonings, any affent to its inferences. Your references, however, to my book, fometimes for what is, and often for what is not, in it, have made a new edition neceffary. The former editions found their own way in the world, and were tranflated into the languages of the continent; owing to the authenticity of their documents, and the ftrength of their facts. But, I prefumed to dedicate this new edition to you, as it will give me an opportunity of repaying your praife, by allowing your merits; of correcting your miftakes, without the acrimony of conteft; and of comparing your doctrines with my own, on interefting topics, without the invidioufnefs of competition, or the anxieties of fear.

I have another motive for this dedication. It is to call your attention to two points, which, though of great importance, you have not fufficiently fettled, in your letter: The first is, with regard to the matter of inftruction; the fecond, in

2

refpect

refpect to the mode. Neither as a philofopher, nor as a politician, have you determined, whether the progrefs of knowledge be happy, in its effects, on the condition of our fpecies. You, indeed, quote Lord Bacon upon the point: yet, you fly off in a fit of Sceptical doubts, as your friend HUME would fay, leaving your readers perplexed in error. I have long thought, and often repeated, that real information is of great ufe, both to the governors, and the governed; as the million, who are well inftructed, are lefs fubject to temporary terrors, and are more free from lafting impreffions, whether they arife from the fophiftry of an orator, or the perfuafion of a pamphleteer. I agree, then, with Lord Bacon, that knowledge is strength. In the acquirement of inftruction, I have listened, at the Royal Society, with pleasure, and improvement, to your papers. As a philofopher, you make experiments, you adjust facts, you deduce juft conclufions, and you fettle an useful principle. The members, indeed, would not liften to loofe affertions, and vague deductions. The Society had been taught, in its youth, by that wonderful man, Sir William Petty, who may be deemed a fecond Bacon, never to talk of any thing in the general; but ever to mention the time, and place, the measure, or the weight, in precife terms. As a politician, you heed not this precept of Petty, though you practise it as a philofopher. Yet, throughout your letter, you

place commerce, and politics, among the Sciences The object of every enquiry is truth. As an enquirer after philofophical truth, you afcertain facts: as an enquirer after truth, commercial, and political, you produce affertions. You may explain the cause of this diverfity of practice in your next pamphlet.

You give a ftriking example of your own practice, in the fecond page of your letter: "The governments of Ruffia, Auftria, Poland, France, and Spain, are either bankrupt, or on the verge "of bankruptcy," fay you. You repeat these affertions; you count upon them, as indubitable truths. PETTY would doubtless ask, Who told you' fo? Where is your document, to prove the time, and place, the manner, and the amount? You would anfwer, in the language of your letter *, "I "believe, that you will admit them at once, as un

queftionable." As Dryden faid to Swift, PETTY would fay to you: Coufin Currie, if, in this loofe manner, you affert so much, and prove fo little, your works, commercial, and political, will not outlive their century.

I will, however, give you the vantage ground of argument, as Lord Bacon fpeaks. I will fuppofe, that you have a document: I will allow, the Britilh ambaffador, at Petersburgh, wrote officially, that the government of Ruffia was on the verge of bankruptcy. Yet, will I deny the inference. There are many queftions to be afked, and anfwered, be

fore we come to fuch a conclufion. Are there not more people in Ruffia than formerly? Are they not more induftrious, and better inftructed? Are there not more labour, more products, and more trade, than ever? Are there not more money, more circulation, and more facilities, than in the great Peter's days? Has not the fovereign, power from the conftitution, over all perfons and all property, within the Ruffian dominions? If the ambaffador were to answer thefe queftions in the affirmative, as the fact undoubtedly is, I should not, if he have the fquare toes of Walfingham, or the reverend beard of Burleigh, burft in his face; but I should laugh, in fecret, at feeing a diplomatic character reafon fo weakly, and write that to be likely, which is barely poffible:

Who wou'd not laugh, if such a man there be?

Who wou'd not weep, if Walfingham were he ?,

And, the event has decided against your affertion, in favour of my argument. The Empress, fince the fettled her accounts with Poland, has repealed feveral taxes, and given new facilities to her people, though I doubt, whether well-doing will either obtain your praife, or ftifle your fcoffs. You have received none of her fnuff-boxes*, though you be a man of letters. And,

Difdain repines at all good things it fees.

But, you are ready with your phyfic, or philofophy, to instruct us, that the blasts of the north give

a vigour to the nerves, and a tone to the fpirits, which the zephyrs, "wanton blowing," can never communicate to fouthern lands. Ruffia may be the Hercules, which Reynolds drew; while Spain may be "the poor country, almost afraid to know itself," which Shakespeare feigned. Yet, have I feen in the British Museum a document, which, having been obtained by Burleigh's art, proves that, Spain had about five millions and a half of people, at the epoch of the armada*. There was, in 1787, an enumeration of the people of Spain, which evinced, that they had increased, during the effluxion of two hundred years, to 10,409,879 t. Yet, Spain has had her emigrations, and her wars, her years of profperity, and her periods of laffitude. Your creative powers may eafily fupply her intermediate employments. The fame documents, which demonftrate, that Spain is now more populous than formerly, clearly prove, that fhe is alfo more induftrious, more commercial, and more opulent. I believe I might add, without fear of difavowal, that he is now governed with more gentleness, and indulged with more immunities, though her forms may be lefs free, than during the good old times of feudal anarchy.

Neither with regard to Spain, indeed, nor the other nations of Europe, have I infpected mi

* See the Sloane MS. N° 908, for the revenue and population of Spain, in 1586, when the perfons mustered were only 1,125,390.

↑ See Cenfo Efpanal Executado de órden del Rey, 1787.

nutely