Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

for a divorce from William Deakins, and of David Beck, praying for a divorce from Ellen, his wife, submit the following report:

H. of R.

treme regret, the dissatisfaction that was prevalent amongst his friends in consequence of the rejection of the resolution recommending a tax The only object which the petitioners can have in on salt. He had voted against that particular view is to be enabled, respectively, to enter into new resolution, and, after reviewing with the most contracts of marriage. Were marriages only a civil rigid impartiality his conduct upon that occasion, institution, the courts of law would be open to all par- he could perceive in it nothing to disapprove. 1 ties seeking the redress now prayed for, for alleged most distinctly and explicitly, said Mr. G., upon breach of the marriage contract: but it is something that occasion, stated in my place that, if the salt more; it is a divine ordinance, and has been pro- tax could, by any gentleman, be shown to be nenounced such by the highest legal as well as spiritual cessary to equalize the system of taxation, I was authority. The competency of any human tribunal to dissolve its sacred obligations may well be doubted. ready to yield my assent to it, although, as was acknowledged, it would operate with peculiar The justice or policy, under any circumstances, of weakening the matrimonial institution, upon the purity which I have the honor to represent. Neither hardship on all the middle country, a section of of which depends the very fabric of society itself, may the honorable Chairman of the Committee of be boldly denied. Divorces are not merely the effect of corruption of manners; they are the cause also. Ways and Means, nor any other gentleman, unThey hold out temptations to crime which human in-dertook to prove that this tax was requisite to profirmity cannot at all times resist. They hold out in-duce this equal effect. I, moreover, then stated, centives to that adultery which they are called in to as I now declare, that I was, and am prepared to remedy. Extreme cases may indeed be put, but they go as far as any man in providing the necessary are rare; both parties are generally in fault. Shall a revenue to sustain the credit of the country in very few individuals, who present themselves in a ques- the approaching contest. My object was to imtionable shape, be debarred from contracting a second pose the taxes on subjects that could best bear marriage, or shall the foundations of society be loosened them. I thought there were many objects of for their special accommodation? Shall the heaviest taxation preferable to salt, (an indispensable of public injury be encountered for the convenience of life,) and was desirous of raising the amount conthose, who, for the most part, have shown how little templated from salt by a tax on whiskey, an adreliance is to be placed upon their virtue or discretion? dition to the direct tax, or in any other more Shall incentives to nuptial infidelity be presented to eligible mode. But it now seems that, if the the great body of society for the personal gratification article of salt is excluded, the whole system of of a few unfortunate members, diffusing dissatisfaction taxation will be endangered. We are told in and discontent, where, but for the deceitful hope of conversation, since the vote on the salt tax, that divorce, they had never been known? The frequency of divorces may be taken as an unthe system which has been presented by the Comerring criterion of the depravity of morals. A respect-mittee of Ways and Means is a system of comable authority has declared, that "from the Reformation to the commencement of the eighteenth century, there had occurred only four instances of Parliamentary divorce; but, in the present reign, they had increased to the enormous number of one hundred and ninety-three." It is notorious that the crime which is made the ground-work of the divorce, is frequently committed with the most "deliberate and unblushing indifference," for the purpose of enabling the adulterer and adultress thereafter to intermarry. Your committee will not attempt to pursue the subject further. It is calculated to inspire the most solemn reflections. They are opposed to divorce upon principle, as tending to excite family discord; as bearing hard upon the weaker sex, whom it is especially incumbent upon us to protect and to cherish; above all, as weakening the

promise and concession, and that it must be taken altogether, the bad with the good; that, if we pay the salt tax, the Eastern and the Western country will suffer peculiarly by an increase of the impost, and by the land tax. The middle country will experience no exemption from these particular burdens. Sooner than this measure should. fail; sooner than we should not provide for the expenses we have incurred to resist the encroachments of our enemy; sooner, in fine, than degrade and disgrace the nation, I believe it would be better for us to take the whole draught, just as it has been proposed. Yes, sir, perhaps I might say, even if it were hemlock. I, sir, would vote two dollars a bushel on salt, rather than Speaker, we who form the majority have all the see the present course of policy frustrated. Mr. same end in view: the maintenance of the rights, honor, and independence of the country against the lawless aggressions of our enemy. To attain this end, I would take the best means. than be defeated in the accomplishment of it, I would agree to any means not absolutely intolerable. It is therefore that I, on the present occasion, will concede much of my own opinion, in order to harmonize with, and conciliate those with whom I unfortunately disagree on this particular point. Concession and compromise, The House proceeded to consider the order of among those who have the same common object, the day. are often indispensable duties. It is by this senMr. GHOLSON said he had witnessed with ex-timent, sir, that I am actuated. We should not

matrimonial tie, upon the sanctity of which depend "all the charities of father, son, and brother." The committee will not enter into the question how far it may be wise or politic to hold forth to the world this District as an asylum for those who wish to obtain absolution from the marriage vow. They will content themselves with submitting the following resolution: Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioners ought not to be granted.

Referred to a Committee of the Whole on Monday next.

WAR TAXES.

Rather

H. OF R.

War Taxes.

MARCH, 1812.

dispute among ourselves. It is by union and harmony only that we can serve our constituents. I, for one, will pledge myself that I will furnish no cause of schism amongst our friends. I am happy, said he, in indulging the hope that several of my friends, with whom I have acted on this sub-plies of salt are drawn. Receptacles for the salt ject, and who have, I doubt not, been influenced by the same motives with myself, will concur with me in the motion I am about to make. Under these impressions. I move you, sir, to reconsider the vote, of Friday last, on the resolution imposing a tax on salt.

Mr NELSON Said he should feel no disposition to object to any gentleman reconsidering any vote which he had given, if it could be said that it had been given with precipitancy, or without mature deliberation. But, when he reflected that this question was not for the first time before the House; that at an early period of the session, two distinct propositions of this nature had been rejected after debate; that the same question had been again discussed in Committee of the whole House; and that the mind of every man was brought to bear upon it, and that it was then decided that a tax should not be laid-he could find no apology for reconsidering that discussion. He found no apology in the reason assigned, that its rejection was evidence of an indisposition to assert the rights of the Government. I do not, said Mr. N., feel myself amenable to this censure, because, let it be known, that when I take a tax away from one subject, I shall not hesitate a moment to impose it to an equal amount on another. Away, then, with the idea that, by the rejection of this item, we shall break up the plan of the Government; more especially, let not such an argument have weight, when I shall show that this tax is incapable of producing any material revenue whatever.

Mr. N. said he had, indeed, been astonished to hear a gentleman say that the rejection of this item would break up the whole system; that there was such symmetry in the report that, take away but one member, and the whole fabric was dissolved. The symmetry of the system had not so forcibly struck him. He saw deformity in it. He saw a heterogeneous mass of discordant materials mixed up together; but not so intimately interwoven that they cannot be separated. Let this item be omitted, as it may be, without a derangement of the system, and the amount expected to accrue from it be levied on some article more productive, which will raise a revenue more adequate to the end which it is the object of the report to attain.

This is the third time this session that the question now under consideration has been presented to the House. I ask the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means (said Mr. N.) what is the object of this proposition? Whether it be intended as a protecting duty on the manufacture of salt, or as a source of revenue, an unfailing certain source of revenue in time of pressure? If we are told that the object is to impose this as a protecting duty on the manufacture of this article, I will ask of the gentleman where is

the necessity of giving this protection? Is there any large capital necessary for carrying on salt works? Do they require any great complication | of machinery? Let gentlemen turn their eye to Turk's Island, the great source from which supwater are dug on the open beach, where the salt is formed by the process of evaporation. The salt is then heaped up, and thence carried to the store-houses. The same process takes place in the manufacture of that article on our seacoast. It is true that at the saline works on our frontier boilers are used. But is there such a peculiar complication of machinery required, involving great expense, that the Government is to hold out encouragement exclusively to this manufacture? Permit me to say, even if were so, it will sufficiently feel the protecting influence of the Government. The moment we are involved in war all foreign salt will be excluded, except that which comes into the country indirectly and improperly. A sufficient bounty on manufacture will be afforded by the monopoly of supply such a state of things will foster. This, therefore, cannot be considered as a protecting duty; it cannot be considered in that light, when we find it incorporated in a system of taxation, which, we are told, is necessary to raise a revenue to enable us to wield the energies of the nation against a foreign enemy.

But, when I turn my eyes to the subject of this tax on salt, which is the source whence it is cal culated that a revenue of $400,000 is to be derived, I am content to discard the idea that the salt tax is a tax on the poor man; that he who eats but little meat must mingle with the salt he uses the reflection, that he pays a tax for this necessary of life, of which, from the absence of other condiments which the more affluent use, he consumes more than they. Putting all this out of view, I will view this question merely on the ground of a tax productive of revenue to the amount which is calculated to be drawn from it. What, asked Mr. N., is the greatest revenue which has ever been drawn from salt? Five hundred thousand dollars, in the most prosperous times of commerce, is the utmost which this tax would produce. Whence is salt imported? From Spain, St. Ubes, Portugal, Liverpool, and a small portion from the West Indies. Viewing this question as a statesman ought to look at it, I would not calculate on the European portion of this trade; I would calculate on the whole European supply being precluded, and our import of salt confined to the West Indies-the total of which is not a tenth part of the amount we usually import. In 1807, the revenue of the United States amounted to upwards of sixteen millions of dollars. According to the estimate of the Secretary of the Treasury, of the revenue derivable from commerce during a war, our revenue from that source will be reduced to about one eighth part of what it was during the year 1807. The amount of salt imported into the United States during the year 1807, was about three and a third millions of bushels. If we only

MARCH, 1812.

War Taxes.

H. of R.

allow the importation of salt to be reduced in the I object to it because salt is an article involving same proportion as the general import-that is to no great expense in manufacture, and because say, about one-eighth of the repeal importation-there is no justice in exclusively patronizing this we shall find on calculation that the quantity im- manufacture, when others do not experience the ported will be about four hundred and seventeen favor of the Government. thousand eight hundred bushels, on which a tax of twenty cents per bushel will produce only eighty-three thousand five hundred and sixty dollars. But the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means has calculated the revenue derivable from this source at four hundred thousand dollars! I do not believe, sir, as our importation will be reduced seven-eighths, that you will get fifty thousand from it. I put then out of the argument the operation of this tax upon an indispensable necessary of life; the argument in its support, bottomed on the revenue it will produce, must fail; it will not produce one-eighth of the estimated amount.

But suppose my calculations are not certainly accurate; suppose it only doubtful whether the source be fallible whence a revenue of four hundred thousand dollars is estimated to be drawn. Is it the policy of a wise statesman to lay a tax, the productiveness of which is doubtful? If the revenue be deficient when the pinch of war comes, what are we to resort to as a substitute? I would much prefer, to this tax, to add five hundred thousand dollars to the amount of the direct tax, which would, at least, not be drawn from the hard-working mass of the community, but from richer subjects. It would be wise to resort to this mode of raising a revenue in preference to the precarious tax on salt, because, like that, it cannot fail-the land is a pledge for the payment of the tax; the salt is not here to be pledged, and never may be.

I ask the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, whether it is intended to connect with this duty the former drawback or bounty on its exportation; for, if we do that, I find, by turning to the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, that the bounty on its exportation will amount to $188,000, double or treble the whole revenue which will probably be received from this tax, and more than could, in any view, be derived from the importations into the country whence the fishermen sail who have heretofore received this bounty.

I trust, therefore, sir, that those gentlemen who at our last sitting were convinced this duty ought not to be imposed, will stand firm to their posts, and not be driven from them by any alarm excited about abandoning the Government, or weakening the measures which the exigency calls for. I have no fear for myself of any such imputation; for, be it remembered, that whilst I discard this tax, as unworthy the consideration of a statesman, I am prepared to substitute for it some one more efficient and better calculated to answer the purpose for which it is designed.

Mr. BACON said, that having heretofore given his views on the subject pretty much at large, he had refrained from entering into the discussion, which had taken place on the subject a day or two ago; and did not propose now to say much upon it. It has been said, that this was a tax bearing peculiarly hard on the middle country. Mr. B. said he acknowledged that he considered it a tax operating on the middle country more than our seaboard or on the Western frontier. But there were various other taxes proposed by this report, which had an important and heavy bearing on the people of the seaboard and cities, and on the people of the Western waters, by which the people of the Western country would be comparatively little affected. I am, said Mr. B., what is called a middle country man, living one hundred and fifty miles from the seaboard; and it would be far from me to impose heavy taxes on such people unnecessarily. The drawbacks, tonnage duty, and stamps, will operate almost exclusively on the seaboard; and the people of the cities will pay their full proportion of the internal taxes. The direct tax will operate with peculiar severity on the Western country, it may be.

Mr. WRIGHT.-Mr. Speaker: I regret that the honorable member from Virginia, (Mr. GHOLSON,) who on Friday last voted against the tax of twenty cents on salt, should now propose the reconsideration of that subject, with a view of fixing this unequal, and of course unjust tax on the people of the United States, or rather on a part of them; however, I hope, that all the "outof-door management," which the gentleman politely calls the interference of his friends, will not produce such a result, particularly as the gentleman has informed us that he is not dissatisfied with his own vote.

I cannot believe, sir, that the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means has not viewed this subject as I have; that he has not examined into the amount of our usual importation in the most prosperous times. I cannot believe that that astute and discerning gentleman has not turned his eyes to this subject, so as to see what revenue this tax will produce; that he cannot see, if the revenue from commerce is to experience a depreciation from sixteen millions to two millions five bundred thousand dollars, the importation of salt must be at least proportionably diminished. He The reconsideration of a subject reflects on the must, then, view this tax as a protecting duty on House for the immaturity of their decision, and salt, and not as a source of revenue. I am against ought not hastily to be adopted. Sir, are we a set affording this protecting duty at the expense of of weathercocks, to be turned about by every idle the poor, the laborious, and the industrious; those wind? No! I hope not, let it blow from what who earn their bread by the sweat of their brows. I quarter it may. Are we ready to present the un

12th CoN. 1st SESS.-36

Sir, when a subject is fully and fairly discussed and decided, gentlemen ought to acquiesce in the decision of a majority, the vital principle of a Republican Government.

[blocks in formation]

gracious spectacle of recording our opinions for and against the same thing? In the first case, on a full discussion of the subject on both sides; in the second, under the "out-of-doors" influence, which the gentleman has informed us has induced him to make the motion. For, the honor of the House I hope this motion will not succeed.

Sir, at the last session, when the question for rechartering the odious British bank was before us, we had to encounter the influence of the Sec retary of the Treasury; and after it was rejected by this House, he, in reply to the inquiries of the Senate, where it was agitated, but fortunately rejected, endeavored to impress its importance on the nation, and by these means to force it on the people. Now. at this session, he has told us, that, if we had a National Bank, we should have no occasion to resort to internal taxes, thereby calling the American people to review the conduct of their Representatives, in not continuing that bank, and thereby to fix the odium of these odious taxes on the National Legislature. Now a system of taxes is presented, truly odious in my opinion to the people, to disgust them with their Representatives, and to chill the war spirit. Yet it is. under Treasury influence, to be impressed on the Committee of Ways and Means, and through them upon the House.

Sir, I, as a Representative of the people, feel it my duty to resist it with all my energies, and not to sacrifice the interest of my country at the shrine of the Secretary of the Treasury, or any other department; though I strongly incline to believe his projected system of taxes has not their preference.

Sir, is there anything of originality in this system? No! It is treading in the muddy footsteps of his official predecessors, in attempting to strap round the necks of the people this odious system of taxation, adopted by them, for which they have been condemned by the people and dismissed from power. We all recollect the clamor againt Mr. Adams's Administration for this system of odious stamp taxes and excises, and the more odious host of tax gatherers, who were let loose upon the peo ple, by whose appointments and patronage the country was then overrun with electioneering agents for that Administration. We all had a hand in impressing this opinion upon the people at that time; and I yet religiously believe it to have been a correct one.

When Mr. Jefferson came into office, he, as President, advised us to put down those odious taxes, and we repealed the law; he also advised us to repeal the law imposing a tax on salt, as oppressive to the poor, and we did so. And now, sir, with the view of destroying this Administration, with this sentence of a dismissal of our predecessors in office before our eyes, a sentence not only sanctioned but executed by ourselves, we are to be pressed into a system known to be odious in the sight of the people, and which on its first presentation in a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury to the Committee of Ways and Means, and by them submitted to us, produced such an excitement in the House.

MARCH, 1812.

Sir, having heretofore made these charges against our political opponents, how can we defend ourselves against their just odium? Are we prepared to urge their correctness now, which we then so successfully denounced? No, sir. I acted then on principle, which is immutable; and I am satisfied the people did so too, and that they will not be found to approve in us what they condemned in our predecessors. I am not so delirious as to take the deleterious draught, by which our political enemies were destroyed; it would be political suicide.

Sir, the proposition to lay a tax of twenty cents on salt ought to be rejected; it is unequal in its operation on the United States, and it is oppressive to the poor. By the Constitution it is provided, as a guard against the inequality of taxes among the States, that direct taxes shall be apportioned among the States by the rate of representation; this fixes the principle by which the States should contribute to the "common defence and general welfare." Does the tax on salt operate in this ratio on the respective States? No, sir, the States of Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio, the Western Territories, are entirely supported by home made salt; the greater part of New York, the western parts of Pennsylvania, and the western part of Virginia, are so in a great measure; and at some of the salt-works, we are informed, at a price not exceeding ten cents. These parts of the Union will, therefore, pay no tax on imported salt. On Friday, it was proposed to lay a tax of ten cents on home made salt, they who did not contribute by the tax on imported salt might pay something to the support of the war by the tax on country salt; but this was not only rejected, but those who opposed the tax of twenty cents on imported salt were denounced as being opposed to taxes to carry on the war, and insinuations made that they were against the war. I think those who do not use imported salt, and who are opposed to the tax of ten cents on country salt, ought to have had the modesty of being silent oa the subject.

Sir, the tax on imported salt will operate as a bounty on home made salt, a net profit to the manufacturer of that article, which he will levy on the consumer; ten cents of which, by way of tax, I wished to draw into the Treasury, but this was rejected.

So much have I urged against the unequal bearing of this salt tax on the respective States; but, sir, I have a still stronger objection to it, its oppression of the poor. Salt is not only a necessary but an indispensable, which the poor cannot do without, and a poor family in proportion to their numbers will consume as much salt as a rich family, and of course pay as much of the tax on salt. Sir, can this be right? No! Let us lay it directly on property, whereby all will be taxed in proportion to their wealth, the only mode in which taxes can be laid by the Constitution of Maryland, whereby the poor are protected from oppressive taxes. Sir, we ought to recollect that we are now on the eve of a war, in which we shall have to pay a tax in blood, and that the poor will pay this tar

[blocks in formation]

in the ratio of the privates to the officers, and yet you make the poor pay an equal salt tax, which at all times would be unequal and oppressive, but at this time impolitic and cruel.

Sir, in the Federalist, the work of Mr. Madison and Mr. Hamilton, we are told, that, in the selection of articles of taxation, it ought to be made so as to bear equally throughout the United States, and that, if after the selection of an article, the practical result proved it unequal, it ought to be discontinued; but now we are advised by the Secretary of the Treasury to lay a tax of twenty cents on imported salt, an article known not to be used in Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio, the Western Territories, the greater part of New York, the western parts of Virginia, and the western parts of Pennsylvania. and that at the t rate of forty per cent., ad valorem, on an indispensable to the poor, when even on luxuries no ad valorem duty ever exceeded twenty per

[ocr errors]

cent.

Sir, in the time of General WASHINGTON's Administration, spirits distilled in the United States out of foreign articles were taxed at the rate of from eight to twenty-five cents, according to the proof; and spirits distilled out of domestic materials were taxed at the rate of from seven to eighteen cents per gallon, according to the proof. But now, on the eve of a war, and as a war tax, when we have doubled the duty on foreign ma terials, and raised the duty on imported spirits from thirty to sixty cents per gallon, we have been advised by the Secretary of the Treasury to lay a tax on whiskey, of three cents per gallon, and the Committee of Ways and Means have had the address to reduce even that to not a cent and a quarter per gallon; but it must and will be recollected, that two of that committee are from Pennsylvania and Kentucky, who are so favored by this system.

H. OF R.

such premises the people will draw very different conclusions.

Sir, that my objections may be distinctly understood, and the inequality of the proposed system in its bearing on Maryland precisely stated, I will refer to the report of the Secretary of the Treasury in eighteen hundred. Then Maryland paid more of the tax on carriages than New York or Pennsylvania, and nearly double the tax paid either by North or South Carolina, and this tax is to be doubled. Then Maryland with eight Representatives, paid $86,718. While Virginia, with nineteen Representatives, paid $144,168; and North Carolina with ten Representatives, paid $46.479, and yet we must not complain. From the same report it does not appear that Kentucky paid anything, and I am informed that it cost the United States five thousand dollars in the costs of non-suits, to no purpose. And, sir, so obnoxious were some of these taxes in Pennsylvania, that we need not now be told of the insurrection against them, and the army that marched to quell it. And yet, sir, the honorable member from Kentucky (Mr. McKEE) and the honorable member from Pennsylvania (Mr. SMILIE) are among the most strenuous advocates of this system; but when its bearing on their constituents is understood, they will forgive them. I am not one of the admirers of such disinterested patriotism, and such devotion to impose equal taxes on all for the "general defence and common welfare." However, I trust that this question will not be settled by their standard, but by the standard of the Constitution. And that I, as a Representative of Maryland, shall be excused for endeavoring to prevent my constituents from bearing more than their just proportion of taxes, when I pledge myself, they will always be ready and willing to pay their just proportion in blood or treasure to avenge the wrongs of a bleeding country, and six thousand two hundred and fiftyseven impressed seamen.

Messrs. MCKEE, SMILIE, and CHEVES, supported the motion.

The question on reconsideration was decided in the affirmative-yeas 70, nays 53, as follows:

Sir, by the report of the marshals heretofore made, nearly twenty four millions of gallons of whiskey were made in this country per year, which by the high price on imported spirits, under a duty of sixty cents, will be increased to thirty millions, I have no doubt; which at ten cents, would produce $3,000,000; but it is proposed to make it produce $275,000 only, not one cent per gallon. Thus, in time of war, a tax of not one cent per gallon, is to be put on whiskey, which, under General WASHINGTON's Administration, in time of peace, was taxed from seven to eighteen cents per gallon; but, notwithstanding that petty tax on whiskey, and no tax on home made salt, sixty cents per gallon is put on imported spirits, twenty cents on salt, five cents on brown sugar, and the carriage tax, heretofore so unequal, is to be raised more than one hundred per cent. on the former tax on carriages; and although those reasons have been urged against this unequal and oppressive tax with a proposi-Israel Pickens, William Piper, James Pleasants, jun.. tion to lay it on property, yet we are charged with having no stomach to the war, and because we will not submit to oppression at home, we will not resist it abroad. This is their modern logic, but I have perfect confidence that from

YEAS-Willis Alston, jr., William Anderson, Stev-
enson Archer, Ezekiel Bacon, Burwell Bassett, Wil-
liam W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Adam Boyd, Wil-
liam A. Burwell, William Butler, John C. Calhoun,
Langdon Cheves, Lewis Condict, Roger Davis, John
Dawson, Joseph Desha, Elias Earle, William Findley,
Meshack Franklin, Thomas Gholson, Thomas R. Gold,
Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy,
Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, Aylett Hawes, Jacob Hufty,
John M. Hyneman, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent,
William R. King, Abner Lacock, Peter Little, William
Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, Thomas Moore, Samuel McKee,
Alexander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, James Milnor,
Samuel L. Mitchill, James Morgan, Jeremiah Morrow,
Anthony New, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby,

Peter B. Porter, Josiah Quincy, William Reed, Sam-
uel Ringgold, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, Ebenezer
Sage, Ebenezer Seaver, John Sevier, Adam Seybert,
John Smilie, George Smith, Silas Stow, William
Strong, Uri Tracy, John Taliaferro, George M. Troup,

« FöregåendeFortsätt »