1810.] 
mortgage, the borrower, it is evident, 
would have a right to deduct from it a 
sum (suppose 4th) equal to that which the 
lender would have had to pay on account 
of such sum, towards discharging the 
debt. . 
It will be observed, that in my estimate 
of the amount of the national debt, I 
supposed that 3 per ceng, would be paid 
off at 60, whereas the Edinburgh re- 
wiewers have asserted, in their critique 
on the bishop of Llandaff, that they 
‘would, and ought to be, paid off at 100. 
On this supposition it is evident that the 
stockholder would. receive back almost 
twice as much as he had lent to govern- 
ment, the equity of which, to say the 
least of it, is certainly not very apparent. 
It would make a very material difference 
also in the proportion which would be 
required of every person’s property to 
discharge the debt. ‘This difficulty how- 
ever would bedone away, atleast withre- 
spect to.4ths of the sum due to the steck- 
holder, by securing to him on the jand 
and houses, the same annual interest 
which he receives at present. The pub- 
lic would, by the method I have pro- 
posed, (as far as ths of his property goes 
at least) fulfil their engagements with him 
to the very letter, for if it is now worth 
while to give nearly 70]. to receive an 
annual interest of 31. without having any 
other than the vague undefined security 
on which the funds rest at present, it 
would surely be worth as much to re- 
ceive the same annual interest when the 
principal was secured on the best of all 
possible funds—that of all the lands and 
houses in the nation, In short, I am per- 
suaded, that after a measure of the kind 
I have pointed out was put in execution, 
3 per cent stock would soon get np to 
80, and probably more than that sum, so 
that if the stockholder had only @ths of 
his real claim secured to him im this 
manner, it would be worth as much to 
him as the whole is atpresent. When bis 
security was changed so much for the bet- 
ter, and 2ths of if were rendered so much 
more valuable, the stockholder. would 
not have much reason to complain, 
even though 4th of his capital, which is 
now worth 68, were paid off at 60; 
neither indeed would it make much dif- 
ference to the public, were they to pay 
the remaining 4th or 66 millions at 68 or 
70, the present price of stock instead of 
60, the price I have calculated upon. 
But a question here occurs, Would not 
the price of stocks, even in this case, be 
subject to the same fluctuation as at 
Practicability of discharging the National Debt 
447 
present? 
placed even upon this footing, be liable 
to be raised or depressed by. any acci- 
dental difference in the foreign or do~ 
mestic relations of the country ? in short, 
would not the French government in ths 
probable future relative situation of the 
two countries, still have it in their power 
to raise and lower stocks at their pleasure 
ina time of peace, and take advantage 
of such changes of price, to put consi- 
derable sums in their own pockets? [ 
must contess, that I think not, especia'ly 
if it were enacted, that the stockholder 
should have a mght, in case of the non» 
payment of his interest, or on the pro- 
bability of an invasion, to be considered. 
joint proprietor with whatsoever land» 
holder he pleased, and be authorised to 
distrain for his dividends in the same 
manner as is done forrent. In this case, 
property in the (new) funds would be 
just as secure as property in land; if 
would be the same at least as a mortgage 
on land, and as little hable to be affected 
in value by any difference in the situation 
of the country with respect to foreign 
powers. In both cases, {that of the 
funds and a mortgage) a permissory right 
to receive the rents would be vested in 
the haids of a second person, who would 
be answerable with his whole property 
for his fidelity in discharging his trust. 
If it should still be found however, 
that funded property was liable ta be 
affected by foreign influence, its anni- 
hilation might be easily effected, and the 
mischief done away at once by the actual 
_ transfer of 4th of theland and houses frem > 
the present proprietors to. the’ stock. 
holders. 
would be in danger of losing the vast ad- 
vantages which they derive from life 
and fire-insurance offices. ‘These insti- 
tutions, valuable as they are, could 
scarcely exist ifit were not for the facility 
which the funds afford of safely investing 
their capital and occasional receipts, and 
as easily obtaining the occasional sums 
which they may be liable to be called 
upon to pay at a ghort notice, 
These institutions are, on the whole, so 
advantageous to a country, that j¢ 
might be worth while to run some little 
tisk of being injured by our neighbors, 
for the sake of ‘retaining them, This 
risk however might be diminished, were 
we to make a transfer of part (say 4) 
of the funded property; by this means 
the floating deot would be reduced to 
about 140 millions, which perhaps ig 
no more than 1s necessary to render the 
funda 
Would not the funds, when . 
But in this case, the publie~ 
f 
ee 
n 
ee 
