Amendments to the Constitution, [8 June] 1789 — reading text

to make up the deficiency this will be lefs odious, and on the ; fcore of revenue, amount to the fame thing. I confider taxes in this point of view : the exigencies of the union call for a fum of money annually ; it muft be raifcd in fome way by a tax on the community ; but it is no matter to the individual, whether he pays his proportion by a tax on fait, or any other article he confumes, but the wifdom of government will dire6l which the money mufl be had ; from fome, and may be taken from any yet prudence will ; dictate to obtain it by means the Icafl odious, leaft unpopu- lar, and moft pleafing. All taxes I admit are odious, but they are comparatively fo. Let therefore this article be left out of the enumeration, and do not apply to it until other means have failed, becaufe it is a very partial and moft odious tax. Mr. Moore Obferved upon the inequality, as it refpeded the con- jumption of the article by cattle fome (laces railed more ; than others, confequently they confumed more ; fome parts of the fame flute were in a like lituation. The people on the fea coafl purfued merchandise ; thofe in the back parts railed cattle, which he was bold to fay confumed five times as much fait as the lower country, and would pay the tax in the fame proportion. It has been faid, that if they pay more on fait, they pay lefs on other articles agreed to. But there are a number more ^vhich may perhaps unequally affect them ; yet it is an argument of fiiiall weight to fay be- caufe we in large commercial cities are regulated in a fump- tuary manner for indulging in luxuries, you who are obli- Z6 DEBATES A. 17C9, ged to retrencJi thems fiiall paj' a tax upon the necefTarics of life. In I'lort, the tax appeared to him not only unpopu- lar, but unjuft likewife, and he would not agree to it. Mr. Smith (of South-Carolma) If any fuither arguments were neceflary to con- vince the committee of the impropriety of the prefent mea- fure, more might be urged, though what has been faid is certainly fufHcient, to demonftrate that it will be attended with a great deal of dillatirfadion, and in proportion to that dilTatisfaction will be the danger of liaving your laws con- temned, oppofed, orneglccicd in the execution It is well, : known that however fmall the duty, it will furnilh a pre- text to the feller to extort a much greater i'um from the conlumer. Another obfervation. It is believed that thp inhabitants of the interior part of South-Carolina are op- pofed the new goverimient, it will be a melancholy circum- ilauce to entangle ourfelves at this time among the llioals of dilcontent ; yet no ilronger intpulfe coulj be given for oppolition than the propofed tax ; conceiving it in this light, he was agaiutt the meafure. Mr. SqoTT Added, that the price of fait where lie lived was 4 dollars a bufhel, the country was lettled three or 400 miles be- yond there, and he fuppofed the pvice there to be greater. Mr. Law RANGE Thought it would be better for the committee to take time to examine what had been urged againft the tax, and as it was the ufual time for adjourning, the committee might rife and defer their decifion till to-morrow. Vv^ hereupon the committee rofe, and the Speaker took, the chair —Adjourned. April 17. The houfe being met, they refolved themfelves into a committee of the whole, on the (late of the union. Mr. Page in the chair, the article of fait recurred. Mr. Lawrance. I had the honor yefterday of delivering my fentiments on this fubjeft, but obfervations were made by gentlemen from different parts of the houfe againft the mealure The — principle objection was that the tax w as an odious one ; it was admitted by a worthy gentleman from Pennfylvania (Mr. Scott) that all taxes are odious, this is certainly true, lor the people are not pleafed with paying them, nothing but neceflity will induce a government to have recourfe to them, it is alfo true, that Ibme are more odious than o- A. 1789. Of C O N G P*. E S S. 87 thers. From what has been laid, it may be feen that this on fait is not fo in general, but only in particular parfs of the union, the remote inhabitants it is faid will be (Jitratisfied, becaufe it encreafes the price of the commodity, and they ufc more of it than others It is mentioned as partaking of the : nature of a capitation tax, but this kind ol' tax is odious, more from its manner of operation than its nature ; we find in fome flates where it is in ufe, the people live eafy undei- it ; for example, it is not complained of in fonie of the ealtern Hates ; we have not mucli to apprehend from a tax on fait in this (late, the people are fatibfied with it, at leafh the complaints are neither fo loud or fd general as to make us appreheiifive for the exiftance of the govern- ment we live under ; its operations, though the contrary was predicted, go on with as much eafe fince an impoll has been laid, as they did before. 1 believe likewife v/e have on- ly to try the experiment, to be convinced it would have a fimilar effecl throughout the continent, for I cannot pur- fuade myfelf that it is generally looked upon in fo odious a light as Ibme gentlemen immagiue — It was alfo faid that the tax would be unequal, and the objeds of inquality were two. The poor man would pay as much as the rich ; but this is not the cafe, the rich are generally more profufe in their confumption than the poor, they have more fervants and dependents alfo to confume it, coiifequently the whole amount of their coniumption mult be in a proportionable ratio. The other inequality was its different operation in different ftates, and even different parts oi" the fame date. On examination this objedion alfo may be obviated. Gen- tlemen tell you the high price of this article at 3 or 400 miles diitance, is it not hence prefumeable that there they confume as little as poffible, while along the fea coalts they ufe it with a liberal hand ? but, whether it be confumed On the lea coaft or on the weltern waters the tax is the iame, or but inconfiderably augmented ; for I take it the great addition which is made is in confequence of the charge of carriage, I cannot therefore fee by what magic gentlemen will prove to you that it is encreafed four or five-fold. We muil alfo take into contemplation the num- ber of perfons who conl'ume it here it will appear, that ; the weight of population is much greater on the fea coafl than in the weltern parts of Penniylvania, Virginia, and Carolina, confequently the confumption mufl be greater. It was laid the argument I urged was not a good one, be- caufe it proved too much, that an article of general con= 88 DEBATES A. 1789. fumption was not the beft article for taxation; now, I believe the inaxim is jult, and when examined it will be found fo. Taxes to be ju(i: IJiould afFecl all, and equally affecl them, and not be left to fall partially upon a few. This is more the cafe with fait than any other article which has yet been taxed, and I believe is the only tax which will get at the pockets of ihofe to whom it is faid to be obnoxious. But how comes it, if the other articles are equally confumed ia the back countries, that gentlemen did not urge the argu- ment of expence on tranfportation, and the pretext a tax would furnilh the feller to extort from the confumer. I believe gentlemen will find it difficult to point out any kind of lupport which they give to government, if this du- ty fliall be retufed ; yet it was hinted that the government would be endangered if they were called upon for this. We are now entering on a fubjeft of a delicate nature, and 1 wifli to treat it as fuch But I will not fnppofe the go- : vernment hazarded by making a revenue law that is right and juftifiable on general principles, if it is, upright men may be willing to rifque the conlequences. The inhabit- ants of every part may find in this law fome article more burthenfome on them than that particular article is on eve- ry other part ; but yet the aggregate paid by them toward the exigences of government is equalled by a difproportion in fome other article. If I did not think the objecfl before the committee of great importance, I would not confume their time in con- tending for it ; but relying on it as an equitable and very productive fund, I muft trefpafs a few words further : This article is of general confumption, perhaps it may be averaged Kt three bulhels to a family annually ; the tax on this will be light, none can be opprefTed, and yet it will bring into the treafury a very large fum. If any family confumes more, and expends it upon their cattle, it ought to be conlidered that enters into the price of the cattle it when brought to market, aud ultimately falls upon the conlumer. Mr. Moore Said yefterday, the duty would opera teunequal^, that ly he thought fo then, and had not yet altered his opi- ; nion, becaufe the back inhabitants confumed five times a« much as thofe on the fea toaft he had exprefled no ap- ; prehenfion that the duty would endanger the government. Mr. Madison. From the nature of the arguments made ufe of on this occafion, it is neceflary to proceed with fome circumfpec-  — ; A. 1789. OfCONGRESS. 89 tion, though not to depart from that policy which can be jultitied by reafon and experience. I am willing to trufl a great deal to the good fcnfe, juilice and penetration of our fellow citizens for fupport ; and though I think it might be jult to lay a confiderable duty generally on imported ar- ticles, yet it would not be prudent or politic at this time to do fo. Let us now proceed to confider the fubjeft before us, on the principles of juftice and principles of policy. In the firlt point of view we may confider the effeft it will have on the different defcriptions of people throughout the United States, I mean different defcriptions as they relate to property. 1 readily agree, that initfelf a tax would be unjuft and oppreffive that did not fall on the citizens ac- cording to iheir degree of property and ability to pay it were it therefore this (ino-le article which we were about to tax, I Ihould think it indifpenfible that it fliould operate equally agreeably to the principle I have juft mentioned. But in order to determine v.'hether a tax on fait is juft or unjuft, we muft confider it as part of a fyftem, and judge of the operation of this fyitem as if it was a but a fingle arti- cle, if this is found to be unequal it is alfo unjuft. Now, examine the preceding articles, and confider how they afie«S the rich, and it will be found that they bear more than a juft proportion according to their ability to pay by adding this article we fiiall rather equalife the difpro- portion than encreafe it, if it is true, as has been often mentioned, that the poor will contribute more of this t«x than the rich. When we conlider the tax as it operates on the different parts of the United States,