Give what the consumers would pay, being
about two livres a pound...........................48,300,000
But they pay at present three livres a pound...... 72,000,000
The difference is..................................23,700,000
The price being thus reduced one third, would be brought within the reach of a new and numerous circle of the people, who cannot, at present, afford themselves this luxury. The consumption, then, would probably increase, and perhaps in the same if not a greater proportion, with the reduction of the price; that is to say, from twenty-four to thirty-sis millions of pounds: and the King, continuing to receive twenty-five sous on the pound, as at present, would receive forty-fire instead of thirty millions of livres, while his subjects would pay but two livres for an object which has heretofore cost them three. Or if, in event, the consumption were not to be increased, he would levy only forty-eight millions on his people, where seventy-two millions are now levied, and would leave twenty-four millions in their pockets, either to remain there, or to be levied in some other form, should the state of revenue require it. It will enable his subjects, also, to dispose of between nine and ten millions’ worth of their produce and manufactures, instead of sending nearly that sum annually, in coin, to enrich a neighboring nation.
I have heard two objections made to the suppression of this monopoly. 1. That it might increase the importation of tobacco in contraband. 2. That it would lessen the abilities of the Farmers General to make occasional loans of money to the public treasury. These objections will surely be better answered by those who are better acquainted than I am with the details and circumstances of the country. With respect to the first, however, I may observe, that contraband does not increase on lessening the temptations to it. It is now encouraged, by those who engage in it being able to sell for sixty sous what cost but fourteen, leaving a gain of forty-six sous. When the price shall be reduced from sixty to forty sous, the gain will be but twenty-six, that is to say, a little more than one half of what it is at present. It does not seem a natural consequence, then, that contraband should be increased by reducing its gain nearly one half. As to the second objection, if we suppose (for elucidation and without presuming to fix) the proportion of the farm on tobacco, at one eighth of the whole mass farmed, the abilities of the Farmers General to lend will be reduced one eighth, that is, they can hereafter lend only seven millions, where heretofore they have lent eight. It is to be considered, then, whether this eighth (or other proportion, whatever it be) is worth the annual sacrifice of twenty-four millions, or if a much smaller sacrifice to other monied men, will not produce the same loans of money in the ordinary way.
While the advantages of an increase of revenue to the crown, a diminution of impost on the people, and a payment in merchandise instead of money, are conjectured as likely to result to France from a suppression of the monopoly on tobacco, we have also reason to hope some advantages on our part; and this hope alone could justify my entering into the present details. I do not expect this advantage will be by an augmentation of price. The other markets of Europe have too much influence on this article, to admit any sensible augmentation of price to take place. But the advantage I principally expect, is an increase of consumption. This will give us a vent for so much more, and, of consequence, find employment for so many more cultivators of the earth: and in whatever proportion it increases this production for us, in the same proportion will it procure additional vent for the merchandise of France, and employment for the hands which produce it. I expect too, that by bringing our merchants here, they would procure a number of commodities in exchange, better in kind, and cheaper in price. It is with sincerity I add, that warm feelings are indulged in my breast by the further hope, that it would bind the two nations still closer in friendship, by binding them in interest. In truth, no two countries are better calculated for the exchanges of commerce. France wants rice, tobacco, potash, furs, and ship timber. We want wines, brandies, oils, and manufactures. There is an affection, too, between the two people, which disposes them to favor one another. They do not come together, then, to make the exchange in their own ports, it shows there is some substantial obstruction in the way. We have had the benefit of too many proofs of his Majesty’s friendly disposition towards the United States, and know too well his affectionate care of his own subjects, to doubt his willingness to remove these obstructions, if they can be unequivocally pointed out. It is for his wisdom to decide, whether the monopoly, which is the subject of this letter, be deservedly classed with the principal of these. It is a great comfort to me too, that in presenting this to the mind of his Majesty, your Excellency will correct my ideas where an insufficient knowledge of facts may have led me into error; and that while the interests of the King and of his people are the first object of your attention, an additional one will be presented by those dispositions towards us, which have heretofore so often befriended our nation.
I avail myself of this occasion to repeat the assurance of that high respect and esteem, with which I have the honor to be
your Excellency’s most obedient
and most humble servant,