It appears from the statement of M. Ducpétiaux (p. 621), that on the 1st of July, 1832, the debts due from the society amounted to 776,021 florins (about 64,661l. sterling); the whole value of its property to 536,250 florins (about 44,698l. sterling); leaving a deficit of 239,771 florins, or nearly 20,000l. sterling. And this deficit was likely to increase every year; the expenses, as they had done from the beginning, greatly exceeding the receipts, a fact which is shown by the following table:—
| Free Colonists. | Beggars. | Expenditure. | Receipts. | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1822 | 127 | .. | 38,899 | 50 | .. | |
| 1823 | 406 | .. | 93,532 | 07 | .. | |
| 1824 | 536 | .. | 106,102 | 72 | 12,339 | 31 |
| 1825 | 579 | 490[17] | 102,983 | 73 | 25,740 | 74 |
| 1826 | 563 | 846 | 163,933 | 45 | 56,476 | 88 |
| 1827 | 532 | 899 | 168,754 | 61 | 50,677 | 38 |
| 1828 | 550 | 774 | 144,645 | 28 | 54,994 | 62 |
| 1829 | 565 | 703 | 174,611 | 44 | 98,523 | 57 |
| 1830 | 546 | 598 | 127,358 | 72 | 67,718 | 72 |
| 1831 | 517 | 465 | 135,405 | 81[18] | 82,578 | 81[19] |
[17] During the four last months.
[18] These sums do not include many of the expenses of administration. They consist simply of the sums remitted to the director for current expenses.
[19] These sums include not only every species of net profit, but in fact the value of the gross produce.
M. Ducpétiaux’s statement may be compared with that of Captain Brandreth, who visited the colonies at about the same period. (pp. 19, 20.)
Among the colonists there were a few whose previous habits and natural dispositions disposed them to avail themselves, to the best of their ability, of the benevolent provisions thus offered for their relief, and who had worked industriously, and conducted themselves well during their residence in the colony. Their land was cultivated to the extent of their means; and their dwelling-houses had assumed an appearance of greater comfort, order, and civilization than the rest. But these were too few in number, and the result too trifling to offer the stimulus of emulation to others.
Those farms that I examined, with the above exceptions, were not encouraging examples: there were few evidences of thrift and providence, the interior of the dwellings being, in point of comfort, little, if at all removed from the humblest cottage of the most straitened condition of labourers in this country.
A clause in the regulations allows certain of the colonists, whose good conduct and industry have obtained them the privilege, to barter with the neighbouring towns for any article they may want.