Consequently， before the Revolution， the burden of taxation was light for the rich or the well-to-do， crushing for the peasants or the common people； after the Revolution， on the contrary， the peasants， the common people， paid no more taxes，[6] while from the rich and the well-to-do the government took all， not alone their income but their capital. - On the other hand， after having fed the court of Versailles， the public treasury had to feed the rabble of Paris， still more voracious； and， from 1793 to 1796， the maintenance of this rabble cost it twenty-five times as much as， from 1783 to 1786， the maintenance of the court.[7] Finally， at Paris as at Versailles， the subordinates who lived on the favored spot， close to the central manger， seized on all they could get and ate much more than their allowance. Under the ancient Régime， "the ladies of honor， every time they travel from one royal country-house to another， gain 80 %. on the cost of the journey，" while the queen's first chambermaid gains， over and above her wages， 38，000 francs a year out of the sales of half-burnt candles.[8] Under the new Régime， in the distribution of food， "the matadors of the quarter，" the patriots of the revolutionary committees， deduct their portions in advance， and a very ample portion， to the prejudice of the hungry who await their turn， one taking seven rations and another twenty.[9] Thus did the injustice remain； in knocking it over， they had simply made matters worse； and had they wished to build permanently， now was the time to put an end to it； for， in every social edifice it introduced an imbalance.
Whether the plumb-line deflects right or left is of little consequence； sooner or later the building falls in， and thus had the French edifice already fallen twice， the first time in 1789， through imminent bankruptcy and hatred of the ancient Régime， and the second time in 1799， through an actual bankruptcy and hatred of the Revolution.
An architect like the French Consul is on his guard against a financial， social and moral danger of this sort. He is aware that， in a well-organized society， there must be neither surcharge nor discharge， no favors， no exemptions and no exclusions. Moreover， "l'Etat c'est lui；"[10] thus is the public interest confounded with his personal interest， and， in the management of this double interest， his hands are free. Proprietor； and first inhabitant of France in the fashion of its former kings， he is not obliged and embarrassed as they were by immemorial precedents， by the concessions they have sanctioned or the rights they have acquired. At the public table over which he presides and which is his table， he does not， like Louis XV. or Louis XVI.， encounter messmates already installed there， the heirs or purchasers of the seats they occupy，[11] extending in long rows from one end of the room to the other， each in his place according to rank， in an arm-chair， or common chair， or on a footstool， all being the legitimate and recognized owners of their seats， all of them the King's messmates and all authorized by law， tradition and custom to eat a free dinner or pay for it at less than cost， to find fault with the dishes passed around， to reach out for those not near by， to help themselves to what they want and to carry off the dessert in their pockets. At the new table there are no places secured beforehand. It is Napoleon himself who arranges the table， and on sitting down， he is the master who has invited whomsoever he pleases， who assigns to each his portion， who regulates meals as he thinks best for his own and the common interest， and who introduces into the entire service order， watchfulness and economy. Instead of a prodigal and negligent grand-seignior， here at last is a modern administrator who orders supplies， distributes portions and limits consumption， a contractor who feels his responsibility， a man of business able to calculate. Henceforth， each is to pay for his portion， estimated according to his ration， and each is to enjoy his ration according to his quota. - Judge of this by one example： In his own house， customarily a center of abuses and sinecures， there must be no more parasites. From the grooms and scullions of his palace up to its grand officials， even to the chamberlains and ladies of honor， all his domestics， with or without titles， work and perform their daily tasks in person， administrative or decorative， day or night， at the appointed time， for exact compensation， without pickings or stealing and without waste. His train and his parades， as pompous as under the old monarchy， admit of the same ordinary and extraordinary expenses - stables， chapel， food， hunts， journeys， private theatricals， renewals of plate and furniture， and the maintenance of twelve palaces or chateaux. While， under Louis XV.， it was estimated that "coffee with one roll for each lady of honor cost the King 2，000 livres a year，" and under Louis XVI.，" the grand broth night and day" which Madame Royale， aged two years， sometimes drank and which figured in the annual accounts at 5201livres，[12] under Napoleon "in the pantries， in the kitchens， the smallest dish， a mere plate of soup， a glass of sugared water， would not have been served without the authorization or check of grand-marshal Duroc. Every abuse is watched； the gains of each are calculated and regulated beforehand."[13] Consequently， this or that journey to Fontainebleau which had cost Louis XVI. nearly 2 million livres， cost Napoleon， with the same series of fêtes， only 150，000francs， while the total expense of his civil household， instead of amounting to 25 million livres， remains under 3 million francs.[14]
