Deffandis to Señor A. Monasterio, Charged with the Department of Foreign Relations, June 27, 1836

Baron Deffandis to the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

The undersigned, minister plenipotentiary of France, has read in the public papers, first, a decree of the general congress of the 17th of this month, which authorizes the government to impose, for the purpose of covering the deficit existing in the public revenues, a forced loan of $2,000,000, which is to be apportioned upon all the extent of the republic, and in such a manner that the maximum of each contribution shall not exceed $1,000. Second, an order of the supreme government, by which the contributions which are to be exacted are divided into four classes, the first of $1,000, the second of $500, the third of $250, and the fourth of $100. Finally, a list addressed to the minister of treasury which contains the names of 200 firms or individuals established in Mexico, upon whom is imposed the maximum of $1,000.

The undersigned reserves to himself to present at a later moment to the Mexican government general observations against forced loans, which, among all means of procuring money, are the most contrary to the principles of political economy, as well as of equity, and which rather appear contributions imposed in time of war and with the idea of penalty, by a victorious army upon its enemies, than imposts exacted in time of peace and for the purpose of the public utility by a regular government from its citizens. But the undersigned believes it to be his duty to abstain at present from such discussions.

On the one hand he has been a witness for a short time past to the efforts which the administration has made with congress to obtain the establishment of a system of finance more in harmony with the present state of civilization and of science, as well as with certain recent portions of the legislation of Mexico, and he therefore hopes the system of forced loans approaches its termination. On the other hand he cannot deny that the present extraordinary circumstances in which the republic is placed demand prompt and extraordinary measures, and this last consideration is sufficient to lead him to maintain silence.

The sentiments of friendship which unite France and Mexico, also, do not permit the undersigned to discuss too readily with the supreme government the measures of public policy to which it may be obliged to resort. He will not, therefore, present any objection against the principle of the present forced loan; he only believes it his imperative duty to address to Señor Monosterio his representations with reference to the apportionment which has been made of the loan by the list addressed to the minister of the treasury.

The undersigned would have desired to await the subsequent lists, in order to judge and discuss with more precision the sum total and the general apportionment of the part that has to be collected in Mexico. But he finds himself obliged to hasten his reclamations by reason of the short term of eight days conceded for the payments; and being obliged to believe, at the same time, that the future lists will be conceived in the same spirit as the one already published, he will proceed to argue upon that natural hypothesis.

Of $200,000, the total of the sums the collection of which is ordered, by the ministerial list, in Mexico, more than 340,000 are to be paid by foreigners; that is to say, these are called upon to pay more than the fifth part of the impost. If, then, as is unquestionable, the apportionment of an impost, whatever it may be, cannot have more than two equitable bases, to wit, the number and the fortune of the contributors, it is easy to prove, by the most simple calculation, established upon these two bases, that the foreigners, and consequently the French, are enormously overcharged.

1. The undersigned will not pretend to make a comparison between the number of the foreign population and the total population of Mexico. This comparison would not be logical, because the greater part of the indigenous population are in a condition that renders it absolutely impossible that they should pay even the least part of the impost, and consequently they cannot enter into any calculation. But limiting himself, as is just, to establishing a comparison between the number of the foreign population and of all that portion of the national population that are in condition to bear their part of the taxes, it is evident that the foreign population, far from contributing toward the present forced loan in the proportion of one-fifth, should pay scarcely the twentieth.

2. If, further, the question is examined under the aspect of the comparative riches of the two classes of contributors, natives and foreigners, the conclusion deduced will be even more unfavorable to the ministerial apportionment. In fact, the religious corporations of the capital alone, who do not contribute more than the sum of $11,000, are immensely richer in capital and even in income than all the foreign population united, who are called upon to pay more than $40,000. It is sufficient, to ascertain this, to cast a glance over the statistics attached to the report presented to congress by the minister of ecclesiastical affairs in 1833.

Adding then to these riches of the religious corporations the very considerable and well-known wealth of the Mexican citizens who appear in the ministerial list, and adding further, as is necessary, the property of ail other persons who are in a condition to bear a part of the impost, it is impossible not to arrive at least at this conclusion, that the foreign population, in place of paying a fifth part of the loan, ought to pay scarcely a fiftieth part.

The projected apportionment of this loan is, therefore, in so far as relates to foreigners, and, consequently, in so far as relates to the French, beyond all the limits indicated by the two sole bases upon which an apportionment of this character can be equitably adjusted.

It also appears a consequence entirely contrary to justice to establish a maximum of $1,000, and still more a minimum of $100, which have been assigned, respectively, as the limits of the individual quotas.

In fact a maximum of $1,000 cannot be equitable, except in so far as it applies exclusively to persons for whom it is an insignificant charge, and perhaps only deprives them of a small part of their superfluous income. If, on the contrary, there is a necessity to apply it to persons for whom it is a very heavy burden, and whom it deprives not only of an essential part of their income, but sometimes of a portion more or less considerable of their capital, it is evident that this maximum has been fixed upon false calculations, and that, theoretically conceived in a spirit of moderation, it is practically supremely oppressive.

With reference to the minimum of $100, in no case can it appear equitable. If it should be applied to the generality of contributors, it would produce infinitely more than the loan decreed, and would be totally ruinous for a multitude of persons. If, on the contrary, as is probable, it is not applied except to a small number of individuals, it will result that the greater part of the population that are in a condition to pay some part of the impost will pay nothing. Why this unjust privilege? Such persons as cannot contribute with $100, might, perhaps, with $80, §60, §40, $20, $10, or $5.

These small quotas would be so much the more proper to re-establish justice in the apportionment of the impost by the diminution of the higher quotas, as it is always the small contributions that yield the greatest sums; as is proved by the history of finance in all countries.

Under grave circumstances, such as those in which the republic is now placed, an apportionment of imposts which should exact only from every person interested in the security and tranquillity of the country such sacrifices as are in proportion to the means of each, would be a measure so necessary and just that no one would have a right to complain. In this manner, in his own country, which has bad its periods of misfortune, the undersigned has seen all the inhabitants, who had the means to do it, hasten to the succor of the state; from the king who gave his millions to the laborer who gave five francs. But an apportionment of contributions which scarcely touches large fortunes, and does not reach in any manner the poorer, but which annihilates the middle class, or those whom it is pretended are such, cannot but give rise to unusual and well-founded reclamations. Thus, the undersigned has received the most earnest complaints from his compatriots with reference to the apportionment of the present forced loan, and he can do no less than to listen to these complaints and become their organ. Besides, with all confidence, the undersigned submits the preceding considerations to the intelligence of the supreme administration, and expects from its justice an apportionment contributions founded upon bases entirely different, at least so far as relates to the subjects of his majesty, and he especially solicits Señor Monasterio to co-operate with all his influence towards this just end.

The undersigned renews, &c.