If you are absolutely determined to exhaust the funds of the taxable community, well; but, at least, do not mock them; do not tell them, "We take from you again, in order to compensate you for what we have already taken." It would be a too tedious undertaking to endeavor to point out all the fallacies of this Sophism.

I will therefore limit myself to the consideration of it in three points.
You argue that France is overburthened with taxes, and deduce thence the conclusion that it is necessary to protect such and such an article of produce.

But protection does not relieve us from the payment of these taxes.

If, then, individuals devoting themselves to any one object of industry, should advance this demand: "We, from our participation in the payment of taxes, have our expenses of production increased, and therefore ask for a protective duty which shall raise our price of sale;" what is this but a demand on their part to be allowed to free themselves from the burthen of the tax, by laying it on the rest of the community?
Their object is to balance, by the increased price of their produce, the amount which _they_ pay in taxes.

Now, as the whole amount of these taxes must enter into the treasury, and the increase of price must be paid by society, it follows that (where this protective duty is imposed) society has to bear, not only the general tax, but also that for the protection of the article in question.