Chapter XIV (2)

| | | | | | | Quarter |
| Destination. | 1846. | 1847. | 1848. | 1849. | 1850. | ending Sept |
| | | | | | | 30, 1851. |
| +-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------------+
| | | | | | | |
| United States | 45.1 | 31.8 | 57.3 | 73.3 | 79.4 | 80.5 |
| British America | 33.4 | 42.5 | 12.5 | 13.9 | 11.7 | 10.8 |
| All other places | 21.5 | 25.7 | 30.2 | 12.8 | 8.9 | 8.7 |
| +-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------------+
| Total | 100. | 100. | 100. | 100. | 100. | 100. |

The accompanying abstract, from the returns of the Emigration Commissioners, exhibits two most remarkable results:--1st, The proportion of emigration to British America and other destinations is gradually falling off; 2d, That to the United States is steadily and rapidly increasing, so that they now receive four out of every five emigrants who leave our shores. Is this distribution to be regarded as a matter of indifference in a political point of view? Are we to understand that it is no concern to us who remain behind, whether the labour and capital of those who leave us shall go to fill up the vacuum of our own colonial empire, or to carry new accessions of wealth and power to those in whose prosperity (to put the matter mildly) we have only a secondary interest? This question the consistent Free-Trader is bound to answer unhesitatingly in the affirmative. In his cosmopolitan philosophy, the interests of one country are no more to be considered than those of any other. The theory of absolute freedom of exchange expunges altogether the idea of nationalism, and regards man, not as a member of this or that community, but as the denizen of a great universal republic. Local and historical associations--ties of kindred and of birth--are only so many obstructions in the way of human progress; and an Englishman is nothing more than the subject of certain animal wants and instincts, the gratification of which he must be left to seek wherever he finds the materials most abundant. Such is Free Trade in its true scope and ultimate tendency. What shall be said, then, of the consistency or sincerity of those pseudo-apostles of the doctrine, who, having been the most active in promoting that nibbling and piecemeal legislation which they choose to call freedom of trade--who have been loudest in proclaiming a universal commercial fraternity, and in denouncing colonies as a wasteful encumbrance--are now the first to take alarm at the natural and inevitable result of their own measures, and to call out for a better regulation of emigration; in other words, for legislative interference with the free action of those of our countrymen who, being thrust out of employment in the land of their birth, are so literally following out the great maxim of buying in the cheapest market and selling in the dearest?

The text is a tempting one, but we must refrain from wandering further from the subject with which we started--namely, the inducements which lead so many of our emigrants to select the United States as their future home. One of the prevalent causes has been very well stated by Professor Johnston--that which we may call the capillary attraction of former emigration:--

"A letter from a connection or acquaintance determines the
choice of a place to go to, and, without further inquiry,
the emigrant starts. Thus for a while, emigration to a given
point, once begun, goes on progressively by a sort of innate
force. Those who go before urge those who follow by hasty and
inaccurate representations; so that, the more numerous the
settlers from a particular district, the more numerous also the
invitations for others to follow, till the fever of emigration
subsides. In other words, in proportion as the home-born
settlers in one of these countries increases, will the number of
home-born emigrants to that country increase--_but for a time
only, if the place have real disadvantages_."--(Vol. ii, p. 204.)

It is vain to shut our eyes to the fact that the government of the United States offers to the emigrant many real, substantial, and peculiar advantages. The first and most important aid that can be given to the intending settler is a complete and accurate survey of the country; and this has been accomplished by the States government at great expense, but in so perfect a manner that a purchaser has no difficulty in at once pointing out, on the official plan, any lot he may have selected in the most remote corner of the wilderness. The next point of importance to him is simplicity of conveyance and security of title; and so effectual and satisfactory is the American system that litigation in original land-titles is almost unknown. Then as to the weighty consideration of price--which perhaps ought to have been first mentioned--the uniform and very low rate in the States of 5s. 3d. an acre saves infinite trouble, disputation, and jealousy. Such are some of the temptations held out to the intending purchaser of land; and it must be confessed that, in each particular, they present a striking contrast to the difficulties he has to meet in some of the British colonies--the arbitrary changes of system, the vexatious delays, and the comparatively exorbitant charges--which must appear to the settler as if they had been contrived on purpose to discourage him. When we add to these the prospects of ready employment in the States held out to other classes of emigrants, and the stringent laws lately made for their protection, both on the passage and on their arrival, we cannot be at a loss to see that the direction which emigration has lately taken is not the result of chance or caprice, but of a deliberate comparison of advantages, which the most ignorant can easily understand and appreciate.

The main object of Professor Johnston's visit being of a scientific character, his remarks on the general topics of manners and politics occur only incidentally; but it is impossible for any traveller to keep clear of such subjects in writing of a country, the peculiarities of which are pressed upon his notice at every hour of the day, and at every corner of the street. Rabelais tells us of a certain island, explored by the mighty Pantagruel, whose inhabitants lived wholly upon _wind_--that is, being interpreted, on flattery; and the visitor of the States who finds himself, as it were, pinned to the wall, and compelled to yield up his admiration at discretion, may be sometimes tempted to believe that he has made a similar discovery, and that the flatulent diet of compliment is somehow congenial to an American appetite. Professor Johnston seems to have had his candour or his eulogistic powers sometimes severely tested, if we may guess from his quiet hint, that "it is unpleasant to a stranger to be always called on to admire and praise what he sees in a foreign country; and it is a part of the perversity of human nature to withhold, upon urgent request, what, if unasked, would have been freely and spontaneously given." He is of course prepared for the reception which any work, aiming at mere impartiality, is sure to meet with among Transatlantic critics; and it will, therefore, not surprise him to find that the above peccant sentence has been already pounced upon by them as proving _malice prepense_, and as affording a significant key to all his observations on the institutions of the States.

The following extract explains the origin of two of those euphonious party designations in which our neighbours delight, and which may perchance have puzzled some of our readers:--

"In England, to be a _democrat_ still implies a position at
the very front of the movement party, and a desire to hasten
forward political changes, irrespective of season or expediency.
But among the American democrats there is a Conservative and
a Radical party. The former, who desire to restrain 'the
amazing violence of the popular spirit,' are nicknamed by their
democratic adversaries the '_Old Hunkers_;' the latter, who
profess to have in their hearts 'sworn eternal hostility against
every form of tyranny over the mind of man,' are stigmatised as
'_Barnburners_.' The _New York Tribune_, in reference to the
origin of the names themselves, says that the name 'Hunkers'
was intended to indicate that those on whom it was conferred
had an appetite for a large 'hunk' of the spoils; though we
never could discover that they were peculiar in _that_. On the
other hand, the 'Barnburners' were so named in allusion to
the story of an old Dutchman who relieved himself of rats by
burning his barns, which they infested, just like exterminating
all banks and corporations, to root out the abuses connected
therewith."--(Vol. i. p. 218.)

Equally mysterious is the term "log-rolling," though the thing itself is not altogether unknown in legislatures nearer home.

"When the trees are felled and trimmed, rolling the logs to the
rivers or streams down which they are to be floated, as soon as
the spring freshets set in, remains to be done. This being the
hardest work of all, the men of several camps will unite, giving
their conjoined strength to the first party on Monday, to the
second on Tuesday, and so on. A like system in parliamentary
matters is called 'log-rolling.' You and your friends help me
in my railroad bill, and I and my friends help you with your
bank charter; or sometimes the Whigs and Democrats, when nearly
balanced, will get up a party log-rolling, agreeing that the
one shall be allowed to carry through a certain measure without
much opposition, provided a similar concession is granted to the
other."--(Vol. ii. p. 297.)

The _Notes_ convey to us the strong impression that Professor Johnston's visit to the West has operated as a wholesome corrective of a certain tendency in his political opinions. He seems to have left home with a warm admiration of American institutions generally, which, like Slender's love, "it pleased heaven to diminish on further acquaintance." At all events, he could not avoid being struck with some of the many perplexities and anomalies that result from referring everything directly to the popular voice. In England, whatever dissensions may arise about the enactment of law, all are agreed in a sensitive jealousy as to the purity of its administration. The most rampant Radical among us looks upon justice as far too sacred a thing to be hazarded in the rude chance-medley of popular election. The keenest partisan feels that, in the lofty and unswerving integrity of our judges, he possesses a substantial security and blessing, for the loss of which no place, power, or parliamentary triumph, could compensate. To one accustomed to regard with veneration the dignified independence of the judicial office in Great Britain, nothing will appear more harshly repugnant to sound policy than the system, lately introduced into some of the New England States, of appointing all judges, high and low, by the votes of the electors of the district over which they are to preside, and for a limited term of years.

"It was deservedly considered a great triumph when the
appointment of judges for life liberated the English bench from
the influence of the Crown, and when public opinion became
strong enough to enforce the selection of the most learned
in the law for the highest judicial offices. Now, passing
over the objection which some will strongly urge, that the
popular electors are not the best judges of the qualifications
of those who aspire to the bench, and that the most popular
legal demagogue may expect to obtain from them the highest
legal appointment, it may be reasonably asked whether popular
influence in seasons of excitement, and on questions of great
moment, may not bias the minds of judges whose appointment is in
the hands of the people?--whether the fear of a coming election
may not deter them from unpopular decisions? The influence of a
popular majority may here as profoundly pollute the fountains
of justice as the influence of the Crown ever did among us at
home."--(Vol. i. p. 150.)

At first sight, it seems quite unaccountable that an enlightened people should ever have devised or sanctioned a system which so obviously exposes the bench to the risk of corruption; and one is at a loss to reconcile a reverence for the law with an ordinance that subjects her minister to the ordeal of canvassing and cajoling all and sundry--perhaps the very men who may next day be in the dock before him. But the root of the anomaly is not hard to find. Into the purest of republics ambition and cupidity--the love of office and the love of dollars--will force their way. But then, under that form of constition, situations of trust and emolument are necessarily few in comparison to the number of candidates for them. The offices in the civil departments of the United States governments are not numerous. The navy employs altogether some five hundred officers above the rank of midshipman--exactly the number of our post-captains; and the whole army of the Confederation, rank and file, musicians and artificers included, is very little over ten thousand men. There is little temptation to enter the medical profession, in which learning and experience go for nothing, and a Brodie is precisely on a level with a "Doctor Bokanky;"--nor the Church, in which the pastor is hired by the twelvemonth, and is thought handsomely paid with a wage of £100 a-year. What field, then, remains for the aspiring spirit but the law?--and what wonder if the sixteen thousand attorneys, who, we are told, find a living in the States, and take a leading part in the management of all public business, should vote "the higher honours of the profession" far too few to be retained as perpetual incumbencies? Hence has sprung the device of popular election to, and rotation in, the sweets of office, which, by "passing it round," and giving everyone a chance, is designed to render it as generally available as possible. The constitution of the judiciary is not uniform, but varies in almost every different state. In New York, the Judges of Appeals, as well as those of the Supreme and Circuit Courts, are elected by the people at large, and for a term of eight years, each leaving office in rotation. In New Jersey they are appointed for six years by the governor and senate; in Vermont, annually by the legislature. In Connecticut nearly the same system prevails as that in Vermont; while in Massachusetts the judges retain office "during good behaviour." The salaries are not less various, in some States the remuneration of judges of supreme courts being £500 a-year, which is about the highest rate; and in others so low as £180. There are no retiring allowances in any case; and as they are thus liable to be thrown out of office at an uncertain period, or compelled to vacate it after a short term of years, it can scarcely be expected that such remuneration will secure the highest grade of legal acquirements, either for the bench itself, or for the inferior offices of attorney-generalships and chief-clerkships, which are all held by the same lax tenure of popular favour. Even if the system has "worked well," as it is said to have done by American writers, during the four or five years it has been in operation in New York--even if it be true that the lawyers of the Empire State have, by avoiding the snares thrown in their way, given proof individually of the probity of Cato, and of a constancy worthy of Socrates, we still say that the State does wrong in putting their virtues to such a test. Mr Johnston supplies us with an example of the temptation it holds out to a dangerous pliancy of principle. Most of our readers must be aware of the existence of an active and noisy party in the States, who, under the name of "Anti-renters," are seeking to free themselves from payment of certain reserved _rents_, or _feu-duties_, as they would be termed in Scotland, which form the stipulated condition of land tenure in a certain district.

"The question has caused much excitement and considerable
disturbance in the State. It has been agitated in the
legislature and in the courts of law, and the supposed opinion
in regard to it of candidates for legal appointments, is said to
have formed an element which weighed with many in determining
which candidate they would support. During the last canvass
for the office of attorney-general, I met with the following
advertisement in the public journals of the State:--

"'I have repeatedly been applied to by individuals to know my
opinions with regard to the manorial titles, and what course I
intend to pursue, if elected, in relation to suits commenced,
and to be commenced, under the joint resolution of the Senate
and Assembly. I have uniformly replied to these inquiries, that
I regard the manor titles as a public curse which ought not
to exist in a free government, and that if they can be broken
up and invalidated by law, it will give me great pleasure;
and I shall prosecute the pending suits with as much vigour
and industry as I possess, and will commence others, if, on
examination, I shall be satisfied there is the least chance of
success. I regard these prosecutions as a matter of public duty,
and, in this instance, duty squares with my inclination and
wishes. 'L. S. CHATFIELD.'

"Mr Chatfield," adds Professor Johnston, "_is now
attorney-general_; and I was informed that the known opinions of
certain of the old judges on this exciting question was one of
the understood reasons why they were not re-elected by popular
suffrage, when, according to the new constitution, their term of
office had expired."--(Vol. ii. p. 291.)

Here, then, we see the highest law officer of the State openly "bidding" for office--truckling to faction--and indecently condescending to enact the part of a "soft-sawderer." That term, we presume, is the proper American equivalent for the stinging _soubriquet_ with which Persius stigmatises some Chatfield--some supple attorney-general of his day--

"PALPO, quem ducit _hiantem_
Cretata ambitio."

When persons of the highest official position scruple not thus undisguisedly to trim their course according to the "_popularis aura_," one can scarcely help suspecting a want of firmness of principle and genuine independence among the classes below them. De Tocqueville's observations have taught us to doubt whether the tree of liberty that grows under the shadow of a tyrant majority can ever attain a healthy stability, however vigorous it may appear externally. No one questions that the Americans enjoy, under their institutions, very many of the blessings of a liberal and cheaply-administered government. You have perfect liberty of speech and action, so far as the government is concerned. The avowal of one's opinion is not followed, as in Italy, or in the rival republic of France, by a hint that your passport is ready, or by the polite attendance on you, wherever you go, of a mysterious gentleman in black; but you feel yourself, nevertheless, perpetually "_en surveillance_," and constrained either to sail with the stream, or to adopt a reserve and reticence which, to an Englishman, is almost as irksome as the knowledge that there is a spy sitting at the same dinner-table with him.

The spirit of Professor Johnston's strictures on such anomalies will, of course, insure his being set down by his democratic friends in America as an unmitigated "old hunker;" and he certainly shows no great liking for practical republicanism. But to find fault with our neighbours' arrangements, and to be contented with our own, are two very different things; and, accordingly, our author takes many opportunities, as he goes along, of showing that he is quite aware of the innumerable rents in our own old battered tea-kettle of a constitution, and of the infinite tinkering it will take to make it hold water.

We should have held him unworthy of the character of a true Briton if he had omitted the occasion of a grumble at our system of taxation, though, of course, we differ with him entirely in the view he takes of the evil. After an elaborate comparison of the taxation in the United States with that of Great Britain, he sums up all with the following somewhat sententious apophthegm:--

"The great contrast between the two sections of the Anglo-Saxon
race on the opposite sides of the Atlantic is this--_On the
one side the masses rule and property pays; on the other side
property rules and the masses pay_."--(Vol. ii. 254.)

The sentence sounds remarkably terse and epigrammatic. Most of such brilliant and highly-condensed crystals of wisdom, however, will be found on analysis to contain, along with some exaggerated truth, a considerable residuum of nonsense; and this specimen before us, we apprehend, forms no exception. Even if the fact so broadly asserted were indisputable, we should still be inclined to doubt, after what the author has himself told us, whether the "rule of the masses" is always an unmixed blessing to a community. He has seen enough of it to know at least that the preponderance of popular sway is not incompatible with much social restraint--with prejudice and narrow-mindedness--with what _he_ considers a false commercial principle--with a disregard of public faith, and of the rights of other nations; and lastly, with a contempt of the rights of humanity itself, and a legalised traffic in our fellow men. But, if we understand him rightly, he does not so much defend the abstract excellence of the democratic principle as advocate a nearer approach, on our part, to the American model of taxation. In the States, he says, property pays--in England the masses pay;--that is, if we strip the proposition of its antithetical obscurity, the owners of property pay less here than they do in America--not only _absolutely_ less, but less in proportion to the whole amount of taxation. The calculations on which he founds this assertion are too long and involved to be quoted at length, but we will endeavour to abridge them so as to enable the reader to judge of their accuracy.

The taxes in the United States are of three classes: 1st,--the _national_ taxes, amounting to about six millions a-year, which are raised chiefly by customs duties on imports; 2d,--the _state_ taxes; 3d,--the _local_ taxes, for the service of the several counties, cities, and townships. These two last classes are levied chiefly in the form of an equal rate assessed upon the estimated value of all property, real and personal.

In order to compare the incidence of the public burdens upon property in the two countries, Professor Johnston selects the case of New York State, in which the total taxable property (personal as well as real) in 1849 was 666,000,000 of dollars, and the amount of rates levied for state and local taxes 5,500,000 dollars, or about 4/5 per cent on the gross valuation. Turning then to Great Britain, (excluding Ireland,) he sets down the fee simple value of the real property alone in estates above £150 a-year, as rated to the income-tax, at £2,382,000,000.

"Four-fifths of a per cent (the rate levied in New York) on this
sum would realise £19,000,000 sterling; and were _all_ property,
real and _personal_, in this island below £150 a-year, and the
amount of property in Ireland rated in a similar way, and fairly
collected, our entire revenue of £50,000,000 would probably be
obtained as the revenue of the State of New York now is, by this
one property tax only."--(Vol. ii. p. 257.)

And he thus concludes that, as regards the _absolute_ amount of taxation, property in Britain escapes for a smaller payment than that in America.

Now, it must be remarked, on this branch of the comparison, that before we can form any opinion as to its soundness, it is essential that we should know on what principles the valuation of property is conducted in New York. The whole question depends upon this. If the system of valuation is different in the two countries, there are no materials on which to build a conclusion. We know what discrepancies may arise out of the mode of valuation, from the fact that, while the annual value of _all_ real property in England and Wales was assessed for the poor-rate, in 1841, at about £62,500,000, _a portion_ of it only--that over £150 a-year--was valued two years afterwards, for the income-tax, at nearly £86,000,000. We observe that Professor Johnston has arrived at the amount of real property in Britain, by assuming the fee-simple value to be twenty-seven years' purchase of the income. But in New York, he tells us, the value of income is calculated at _only sixteen and a half years'_ purchase. The terms of the comparison are, therefore, manifestly faulty. And mark how this affects the result. The real income of Great Britain, capitalised at sixteen and a half years' purchase, would amount to only £1,447,000,000, and, if taxed at the same rate as in New York, would yield, instead of £19,000,000 only, £11,500,000, which, as it happens, _is three millions less than it actually pays_, as may be plainly seen from the undernoted statement:--

DIRECT AND LOCAL TAXATION OF REAL PROPERTY IN GREAT BRITAIN.

1. Land Tax, £1,164,000
2. Poor and County Rate, (England,) 6,847,205
3. Highway Rate, " 1,169,891
4. Church Rate, " 506,812
5. Proportion of Stamp Duties on deeds affecting real property, 1,200,000
6. Proportion of Legacy Duty affecting do., 300,000
7. Property Tax, 2,600,000
8. Poor Rate, (Scotland,) £577,000--say on real property, 500,000
9. Statute Labour, (Scotland,) 81,226
----------
Total, £14,369,134

_Note._--The first six items are taken from the Report of the
House of Lords on burdens affecting land, and some of them are
below the present amounts. The items affecting Scotland are
obviously defective.

To this extent at least, then, we are justified in correcting Professor Johnston's calculations, and in affirming with certainty that the owner of _real property in Britain surrenders a larger portion of his wealth for the public service than in New York_, or any other State of the Union. Whether the same can be said of the British owner of _personal_ property is another question, which we shall come to by-and-by.

So much for the _absolute_ comparison. But then Professor Johnston aims also at proving, that while the rich man is better off here, the poor man is worse--that the "masses" (_i. e._, we presume, those who are dependent on the wages of labour) pay a larger share of the public burdens than the same "masses" do in America. And this, he thinks, is demonstrated by the fact, that the customs duties of America amount to only a dollar a-head of the whole population, whereas in Great Britain they are _three_ dollars--three times heavier. Now, we venture to affirm that, as a contrast between the position of the labouring man on this side of the Atlantic, and that of his brother on the other, this statement is quite a nest of fallacies. In the first place, it proceeds on the assumption (a very common but erroneous one among our Free-Trade authorities) that it is the labouring class who pay the bulk of the taxes drawn in the shape of customs. As this error, however, may be held to affect both sides of the comparison equally, we have next to notice that, admitting it to be the case, the fact of the customs being three dollars a-head in this country, and only one in the States, only shows that the English labourer pays _absolutely_ more than the Yankee, which no one ever doubted. It amounts only to this--that in an old country which has to uphold numerous public institutions unknown in America, and with a public debt to provide for of some £800,000,000 sterling, the burden of this, as well as of all other branches of taxation, is heavier than in the youthful republic, with a national debt of only £13,000,000. In order to draw a fair parallel between the cases as regards the poorer classes of both countries, we must put the question in a different way, and inquire, what proportion does the amount of customs (assumed as representing the poor man's share of taxation) bear _to the whole public burdens_ in the two countries respectively? The contrasted account would then show the matter in a very different aspect from that in which Professor Johnston has represented it, and would stand thus:--

| GREAT BRITAIN. | UNITED STATES. |
| | |
| National taxes, £50,000,000 | National taxes, £6,000,000 |
| Local ditto,[7] 14,000,000 | Local ditto,[8] 5,680,000 |
| ----------- | ----------- |
| Total, £64,000,000 | Total, £11,680,000 |
| Whereof the poor man's | Whereof the poor man's |
| share, or customs, is £20,000,000 | share, or customs, is £6,000,000 |
| or 32½ per cent. | or 52 per cent. |
| | |

[7] We give this amount as it is usually estimated, although it is
certainly far below the truth.

[8] _The American Almanac_ for 1851.

Even if we were to throw into the scale a large portion of the excise duties levied in Britain, which Professor Johnston may be entitled to claim as a peculiar burden on "the masses"--at least as much as the customs--it would still be apparent, that, if such payments are to be taken as a fair criterion, _the people's burdens are not relatively heavier here than in America_. We shall only add further on this subject, that while many of the less opulent class of our fellow-citizens have undoubted real grievances to complain of, and while writers, with worse intentions than Professor Johnston, are ever ready to exaggerate them, and to foster discontent, it becomes one of his high character to guard against allowing a somewhat undisciplined taste for statistics to betray him into rash general allegations, calculated to produce error and irritation.

The parallel he has drawn, however, is very instructive on one point, although he has failed to notice it. He has taken some pains to prove that, tried by the American standard, our poor men pay too much, and our owners of real property too little, in both which conclusions we have shown his grounds to be fallacious; but he takes no notice of a far more obvious anomaly, the glaring injustice of which is every day attracting more public comment--the comparative _immunity of the owners of personal property_ in this country. The local taxation of the States, it has been seen, is levied by an equal assessment on property _of all kinds_; and although, from the character of a great part of the country, the real property much exceeds the movable in amount, the rate upon both is a uniform one. No description of possessions is favoured with an invidious exemption. We will take the assessment of one State as an example, and copy the following "Items of the valuation of the taxable property for the State of Iowa, according to the assessor's returns for 1849." They are as follows:--

"Acres of land--Improvements on land--Town lots and
improvements--_Capital employed in merchandise_--Mills,
manufactories, distilleries, carding machines and tan-yards,
_with the stock employed_--Horses, cattle, sheep, &c.--Pleasure
carriages, watches, pianofortes--_Capital stocks and profits
in any company incorporated or unincorporated_--Property
in boats and vessels--Gold and silver coin, and bank-notes
in actual possession--_Claims for money, or other
consideration--Annuities--Amount of notes, mortgages, &c. All
other personal property over 100 dollars._"

All these descriptions of property contribute alike, dollar for dollar, towards the expenses of the State, which--be it remarked--embrace not only the general charges for interest of debt, and for the support of the legislative, executive, and judiciary departments, but include also payments for prisons, asylums, the militia, the public roads, and several other branches of expenditure, which in this country are saddled either upon real property or upon the land alone. Let any one look at the items of the above list printed in italics, and say what portion of such wealth passes through the national exchequer, or goes to uphold the public institutions, of Great Britain. The whole annual incomes above £50 a-year in Great Britain are estimated, on the best attainable data,[9] to amount to upwards of £352,000,000 sterling, of which the taxed real income is £86,000,000, or one-fourth part only. Is there any one with a conscience so elastic as to maintain that the owners of the other three-fourths contribute fairly to the support of the State, in proportion to the revenue they enjoy under its protection? From the investigations of Mr Smee, to whom we have referred, it appears that while the number of those who pay the direct taxes is about five hundred thousand, _there are upwards of one million eight hundred thousand persons in Great Britain enjoying incomes of above £50 a-year, who do not contribute one farthing to them_. What is this but a system of iniquitous exemption of the one class, and of virtual confiscation as to the other? But the whole subject occupies far too prominent a place in the public mind to be treated thus incidentally. For the present then we leave it, thoroughly persuaded that, under a form of government which acknowledges no distinctions between classes and interests, so shameless a violation of the plainest principles of equity cannot long be permitted to continue, and cordially joining in the wish that no object of less momentous interest--no schemes of impracticable retrenchment--no wily bait of extended suffrage--no flourishing of the old red rag of reform, may be suffered to distract the attention of the public, from the one great paramount practical reform--A READJUSTMENT OF TAXATION.

[9] See Mr Smee's pamphlet on the Income-Tax.

We owe an apology to Professor Johnston for having deviated somewhat from the ordinary course of a review. His work has already been so much and so flatteringly noticed, that to have limited ourselves to mere abridgment and quotation from the _Notes_ would have led us over the same ground that has been already exhausted by other critics. We have therefore preferred discussing some of the questions of greatest public interest which his observations have suggested; and if, on some of these, we have been led to dissent from his opinions, we have done so in no unfriendly spirit, which indeed would have been impossible in judging of an author whose own views are always expressed with perfect candour and moderation. There can be no doubt that, under the unpretending title which he has chosen to adopt, he has contrived to bring together a larger mass of varied and valuable information on the present condition of North America than is to be found in any work yet published.

THE ANSAYRII.

_The Ansayrii (or Assassins;) with Travels in the Further East._ By the Hon. FREDERIC WALPOLE, R.N., Author of _Four Years in the Pacific_. London: Bentley, 1851.

Hail to the bright East, with all its mysteries, its mighty past, its pregnant future, its inexhaustible sources of airiest amusement and most solemn interest! We welcome with pleasure the original and truly Oriental book before us. It harmonises rather with the poetic than the historic character of Eastern lands; but in its wild and dreamy narrative there are to be found vivid and faithful pictures, such as those that lighted up the charmed reveries of DeQuincey. For the present we will lay aside the critic's task: we will postpone all such considerations, and invite the reader to accompany us in a rapid tour over the varied regions which Mr Walpole has recalled to our memory and imagination. Let us turn for a little from the "world that is too much with us," and, ranging away from chilly mists and gloomy skies, sun our fancy in the lands where Paradise was planted.

Egypt and Palestine appear familiar to us all; they are of common interest to the whole Christian world--classic lands to every old villager who can read his Bible, as well as to the profound scholar. In them, sacred and profane history are so intimately blended that the latter assumes almost the authenticity of the former. Herodotus and his followers have actually a people still in the flesh (if flesh the mummy may be called) to refer to: subterranean Egypt is still inhabited by the undecayed bodies of the very men who associated with the Israelites, and forms that were beautiful and loved three thousand years ago. Imperishable as their old inhabitants, their temples and their monuments still stand above them, and will there remain unparalleled, until their long-buried architects shall rise again.

Passing on to Palestine, we find, memories and associations still stronger and more striking; for here nature is invested with the sentiment that in Egypt is awakened by art. Palestine belongs not to time only, but to eternity; with which, by types and illustrations, its earthly history is so beautifully blended and aggrandised. Its literature is inspired truth, its annals are prophecies fulfilled, and the very face of the land itself vindicates the beauty it _once_ wore, through all the sorrow and desolation that have fallen on it since. Owing to the metaphorical style of Oriental composition, every object in nature was used to illustrate or impress by its analogy; and hence not only the holy mountains, the sacred rivers, and the battle plains have memories for us, but the very "hyssop on the wall," the blasted fig-tree, the cedar, the "high rock in the thirsty land;" every vale, and hill, and lake, and city, is consecrated by some association with the men who spoke the words of God--with the time that witnessed His presence in the flesh.

The remorseless Jews were swept from the Promised Land, as their ancestor was from Eden, for the irreparable sin; and the sword of the Roman waved over the ruined walls of Jerusalem, forbidding all return. The Saracen and the Crusader succeeding, add another element of interest--an English association--to long-tried and suffering Judea. The Crusaders were rather a warlike emigration than invasion; they were the angry overflow of discontented Europe, which sought to vent its spleen and dogmas upon the Infidel. Their ebbing tide bore back to us the arts and sciences and chivalry of Arabia; and thus Palestine became the channel for all our best temporal acquirements, as it had long since furnished us with our eternal hope.

All this, and more--much more--invests Syria with undying and exhaustless interest to the student and the traveller; but we will not linger on such impressions now. We have a lighter task to fulfil, though we are about to visit the land of Nimrod, of Abraham's nativity, and of the empire of Semiramis. The pleasant company in which we travel will speed us on; and, in the old troubadour fashion, lay and legend will beguile the way. But before we enter fairly on our pilgrimage to "Ur of the Chaldees" and the tomb of Nineveh, we shall pause to make some practical observations on the route which, in its present aspect, may be new to some of our readers.

EGYPT MAY SOON BE REACHED IN TEN DAYS.[10] This is almost incredible; still more so, when we add that it may be accomplished without fatigue, hardship, or self-denial. The traveller even now embarks at Southampton in one of the Oriental Company's magnificent steamers, and finds himself landed at Alexandria in fifteen days, having visited Gibraltar and Malta, besides having travelled three thousand miles in as much comfort as he would have enjoyed at Brighton, with far more advantage to his health and spirits, and but trifling additional expense. For our own parts, we believe that, before long, sea voyages, instead of sea shores, will be resorted to, not only by the invalid, but by the epicurean and the idler. The floating hotels of our ocean steamers afford as comfortable quarters as any of their more stationary rivals, with the additional advantage of presenting a change of air and of scenery every morning that the "lodger" rises.

[10] By the leviathan steamers now building for the Peninsular and
Oriental Steam Company. They are calculated to make from sixteen to
eighteen miles an hour, which would reduce the sea-going part of the
voyage to eight days two hours.

The autumn--the later the _better_--is the _best_ period for visiting Egypt. October is, on the whole, the best month for beginning the ascent of the Nile. We will suppose the traveller landed at Alexandria: he achieves the lions of that suddenly-created city (except Aboukir Bay) in a few hours, and is ready to start for Cairo in the mail steamer, with the India-bound passengers who accompanied him from England. The country in which he now finds himself, by so sudden a transition, is full of apparent paradoxes; amongst others, he may be surprised to find that the canal on which he travels to Atfeh winds considerably, though no engineering obstacles whatever oppose themselves to a straight course. The reason of this sinuosity was thus explained to us by Mehemet Ali himself:--"You ask why my canal is not straight: Ya, Wallah! it is owing to a bit of bigotry. The dog who made it was a true Believer, and something more. He said to himself, 'Ya, Seedee, thou art about to make what Giaours call a canal, and Giaours in their impiety make such things straight. Now, a canal is made after the fashion of a river--(Allah pardon us for imitating his works!)--and all rivers wind: Allah forbid that my canal should be better than His river; it shall wind too.'"

And so it does.

Landed at Cairo, the traveller of the present day will find a steamer once a fortnight ready to take him up to the first cataract and back again, as fast as Young Rapid, or any other son of a tailor, could desire. But even the rational tourist will be tempted to send on his Kandjiah, (the old-fashioned Nile boat,) well found and provisioned, a fortnight or three weeks before him, and overtake her in the steamer. The Kandjiah voyage up stream is often wearisome, downward never--as in the descent you are borne softly along at from three to six miles an hour, even when you sleep. From the first cataract to the second is only about two hundred miles, and occupies about three weeks; but to those who can find pleasure in what is most wild and dreamy and unearthly in scenery and art, the desert view from Mount Abousir, the temples of Guerf, Hassan, and Ipsamboul, are worth all the rest of the Nile voyage, except Thebes and exquisite Philæ.[11] Returned to Alexandria, as we will suppose, in March, the traveller will be quite early enough for Syria, whose winter (considering the tented life he is compelled to lead) is not to be despised. A steamer transports him to Beyrout in thirty hours; and there our true travel begins.[12]

[11] The mere physical pleasure of the upper voyage has been
thus described--"No words can convey an idea of the beauty and
delightfulness of tropical weather, at least while any breeze
from the north is blowing. There is a pleasure in the very act of
breathing--a voluptuous consciousness that existence is a blessed
thing: the pulse beats high, but calmly; the eye feels expanded;
the chest heaves pleasureably, as if air was a delicious draught
to thirsty lungs; and the mind takes its colouring and character
from sensation. No thought of melancholy ever darkens over us--no
painful sense of isolation or of loneliness, as day after day we
pass on through silent deserts, upon the silent and solemn river.
One seems, as it were, removed into another state of existence; and
all the strifes and struggles of that from which we have emerged
seem to fade, softened into indistinctness. This is what Homer and
Alfred Tennyson knew that the lotus-eaters felt when they tasted
of the mysterious tree of this country, and became weary of their
wanderings:--

'----To him the gushing of the wave
Far, far away, did seem to mourn and rave
On alien shores: and, if his fellow spake,
His voice was thin, as voices from the grave!
And deep asleep he seemed, yet all awake,
And music in his ears his beating heart did make.'

If the day, with all the tyranny of its sunshine and its innumerable
insects, be enjoyable in the tropics, the night is still more so.
The stars shine out with diamond brilliancy, and appear as large as
if seen through a telescope. Their changing colours, the wake of
light they cast upon the water, the distinctness of the milky way,
and the splendour, above all, of the evening star, give one the
impression of being under a different firmament from that to which
we have been accustomed; then the cool delicious airs, with all the
strange and stilly sounds they bear from the desert and the forest;
the delicate scents they scatter, and the languid breathings with
which they make our large white sails appear to pant, as they heave
and languish softly over the water."--(_The Crescent and the Cross_,
vol. i. p. 210.)

[12] The journey from Cairo across the desert by Suez, or at least
thence by Gaza or Sinai to Jerusalem, is performed in the same
manner as it was in the days when Eothen, Dr Robinson, and Lord
Castlereagh described it. The only difference occurs in the route
between Cairo and Suez, which is now performed on wheels in about
twelve hours, and, in the course of eighteen months, is expected to
be easily accomplished in two hours and a half by railway.

Thus, (omitting the somewhat important episode of Egypt,) we find ourselves transported, in little more than a fortnight, from the murky fogs and leafless trees of England, to the delicious temperature and tropical verdure that surrounds the most beautiful town of the Levant. As every improvement in steam-navigation lessens its distance from Christendom, Beyrout increases and expands. Nor must we omit an honest tribute to the iron but even-handed justice of Ibrahim Pasha, which first rendered it safely accessible to Europeans. Before his conquest of Syria, the Frank was wont to skulk anxiously through the town, exposed to insult and unpunished violence: without the walls, the robber enjoyed as much impunity as the bigot did within; and, between both, Beyrout became, or continued to be, a miserable village. Its environs were wild wastes, where the gipsy alone ventured to pitch his tent, and the wild dog prowled. Now, pleasant gardens and picturesque kiosks, or summer-houses, replace the wilderness; the town expands, grows clean, doubles its population, and welcomes a crowd of shipping to its port. A more delightful residence, as a refuge from winter, can scarcely be conceived. An infinite variety of excursions may be made from hence; and every time the traveller mounts his horse, whether he be historically, picturesquely, controversially, botanically, or geologically given, he may return to his flat-roofed home with some valuable acquisition to his note-book. The views are everywhere magnificent, and the warm breezes from the bluest of oceans are tempered by the snowy neighbourhood of the loveliest of mountains.

Five roads of leading interest (besides many a cheering byway among the hills) branch out from the walls of Beyrout. Damascus is about eighteen hours off; Jerusalem six days; Djouni, the romantic residence and burial-place of Lady Hester Stanhope, ten hours; Baalbec, the flower of all Eastern ruins, eighteen hours, and Latakia, whither _we_ are bound, five days. These distances may be accomplished in less time; they are here given at the calculation of a walking pace, as the roads, or rather paths, are for the most part steep and difficult; and the baggage-horses, at all events, can seldom advance more rapidly. One word more of dry detail, and we shall put ourselves _en route_ for the mountains of the Ansayrii and the further East. Notwithstanding the advance of civilisation at Beyrout, where a European consulocracy has established a more than European equality of privileges between Turks and Christians, the interior of the country is daily becoming more dangerous to travel in. Eight years ago, when the stern rule of Ibrahim Pasha had still left its beneficent traces, the writer of this article wandered over the length and breadth of the land, attended by a single servant and a muleteer. Since our Government, for inscrutable reasons, has restored Syria to the embroilment of its native factions, all security for the traveller, and indeed for the native, has ceased. To reach Jerusalem, or even Damascus, in safety, a considerable escort is now necessary; though the Vale of Baalbec may still be reached in less warlike fashion from Latakia or Tripoli, if the traveller is endowed with liberality, courage, and courtesy--the leading virtues of his profession.

Before we proceed on our travels, let us introduce our guide. Mr Walpole is a young naval officer, and there is in most of his narrative a dashing impetuous style, which savours of his profession. In this there is a certain charm, imparting as it does an air of frank and fearless confidence in his reader's quick perception and favourable construction. There is in his writings what we would also hope is professional--a chivalrous feeling and generous sentiment, that is never obscured by a sordid thought or unworthy imputation. As he sees clearly, of course he also sees faults in men, and minds, and manners; but such discoveries are made in a tone of regret rather than of triumph; or thrown off in a strain of good-humoured satire that could not offend even its objects. His descriptive powers are graphic, and often very vivid; his humour is very original, being generally tinged with melancholy, in such sort as that of a philanthropic Jacques might be: finally, he does not fear to display a profound and manly reverence for holy things and sacred places. On the other hand, to set against all these high merits, we must confess that many faults afford some drawback to his book. It is often incoherent, and deficient in arrangement. The first volume is rather the groundwork than the accomplishment of what an author with Mr Walpole's powers and material should have effected. Most of these faults, however, may find their excuse in the circumstances under which they were composed. They smack of the tent, the boat, and the bivouac, as old wine does of the _borachio_. Whatever they may be, this work is one that will be widely read; and wherever it is read with appreciation, it will direct the interest not only to its subject, but its author: his individuality, unostentatiously and unconsciously, is impressed on every page; and his genius, however erratic, is unquestionable.

The cockpit, and even the gun-room of a man-of-war, are little favourable to intellectual effort, or the habit or the love of learning which it can alone accomplish. We can therefore make greater allowances for errors in composition, and concede greater credit for the attainments in languages and general knowledge which our young author has achieved. This is perhaps still more striking in a work written by Mr Walpole three years ago, entitled _Four Years in the Pacific_, which, though written in a midshipman's berth, abounds in passages of beauty, and in his peculiar and original humour. Having said so much in his praise and dispraise, and only premising, in addition, that he speaks Arabic and Turkish, so as to interpret for himself the quaint unusual thoughts of the people among whom he lives, we enter upon a survey of what he saw.

We have unwillingly passed over the whole of our author's outward voyage, which is graphically, and almost dramatically, described. We shall only refer to one or two passages respecting the Levant. The following sentence may dispel some fanciful visions of the sunny climate of Stamboul:--

"Snow, 'thick and deep' enveloped the city; cupola, dome,
and cypress were burdened with icicles; above, was an angry
winter sky with a keenly piercing wind.... English fires and
English coals were the best things we saw--we were actually
blockaded by the weather.... At length we embarked: the crew
were shovelling the deep snow-drift off the deck, so we rushed
below into a cabin whose bulkheads were beautifully varnished,
sofas perfect, skylights closed, the whole atmosphere tobacco.
We were off, gliding past the Seraglio Point, which was swathed
in snow, and looking like a man in summer clothes caught in a
wintry storm.... Masses animate and inanimate encumbered the
deck; the former for the most part consisting of the Sultan's
subjects; among the latter our baggage, which was thrown into
the general heap, and kicked about until it found quiet in the
hold.... The numbers thus congregated were principally pilgrims,
on their way to Jerusalem and to the Jordan; though others, on
more worldly journey bent, were mingled with the rest. Each
family had taken a spot on the deck, and there, piled over with
coverings, and surrounded with their goods, they remained during
the voyage: one side of the after-deck was alone kept clear for
the first-class passengers, and even this was often invaded by
others, who wisely remarked that _we_ had cabins below.