[65] A tax rated by the intendant in each generality, on the presumed fortune of every person below the degree of a gentleman.

[66] Before the war it was sold to, or rather forced on, the consumer at 11 sous, or about 5_d._ the pound.  What it is at present, I am not informed.  Even this will appear no trivial imposition.  In London, salt may be had at a penny farthing per pound from the last retailer.

[67] Page 31.

[68] Page 33.

[69] Page 33.

[70] Page 33.

[71] The figures in the “Considerations” are wrongly cast up; it should be 3,608,700_l._

[72] “Considerations,” p. 43.  “State of the Nation,” p. 33.

[73] Ibid.

[74] Page 34.

[75] The author of the “State of the Nation,” p. 34, informs us, that the sum of 75,000_l._ allowed by him for the extras of the army and ordnance, is far less than was allowed for the same service in the years 1767 and 1768.  It is so undoubtedly, and by at least 200,000_l._ He sees that he cannot abide by the plan of the “Considerations” in this point, nor is he willing wholly to give it up.  Such an enormous difference as that between 35,000_l._ and 300,000_l._ puts him to a stand.  Should he adopt the latter plan of increased expense, he must then confess that he had, on a former occasion, egregiously trifled with the public; at the same time all his future promises of reduction must fall to the ground.  If he stuck to the 35,000_l._ he was sure that every one must expect from him some account how this monstrous charge came to continue ever since the war, when it was clearly unnecessary; how all those successions of ministers (his own included) came to pay it, and why his great friend in Parliament, and his partisans without doors, came not to pursue to ruin, at least to utter shame, the authors of so groundless and scandalous a profusion.  In this strait he took a middle way; and, to come nearer the real state of the service, he outbid the “Considerations,” at one stroke, 40,000_l._; at the same time he hints to you, that you may expect some benefit also from the original plan.  But the author of the “Considerations” will not suffer him to escape it.  He has pinned him down to his 35,000_l._; for that is the sum he has chosen, not as what he thinks will probably be required, but as making the most ample allowance for every possible contingency.  See that author, p. 42 and 43.

[76] He has done great injustice to the establishment of 1768; but I have not here time for this discussion; nor is it necessary to this argument.

[77] Page 34.

[78] In making up this account, he falls into a surprising error of arithmetic.  “The deficiency of the land-tax in the year 1754 and 1755,[80] when it was at 2_s._, amounted to no more, on a medium, than 49,372_l._; to which, if we add half the sum, it will give us 79,058_l._ as the peace deficiency at 3_s._”