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

fubjedl of revenue can we go that will prove equally produdive ? It is therefore requifite that we lay this kind of tax ; in fo doing, if it is neceflary to difcriminate between oUr own citizens and foreigners, why is it not proper likcwife to difcriminate between our commercial friends and commercial enemies, if the policy isgood in one cafe it is fo in the other ; we muft not only encourage our friends to continue in alliance, but hold out an advantage to thofe of whom we want a reciprocity. It has always been the praftice of that very nation to difcrimi- nate, who it is fufpeded will take umbrage at our doing it. Has not Britain laid heavy duties upon the wines of France ind lower on thofe of Portugal, in order to encourage the trade and conmierce of their ally ; they have by this means made France agree to receive their nianufadures. It is the practice of wile nations to adopt regulations of this nature ; and molt undoubtedly, faid he, if any nation on earth has a right to exped a favorable regulation on cur fide, it is the one that, 1 may fay, has given us the power to deliberate. 1 conceive fuch a regulation wife, juft and politic, the con- trary do6lrine I view as pufillanimous, founded in folly, injuitice and impolicy for my part, I wiih for greater dif- ; crimination than is now propofed; inftead of refting it here, I fliould have confented to have gone much further. I be- lieve the price of freight has not rifenin Virginia, though the BritiOi vefFels are fubjefled to a tonnage duty of dou- ble the amount of what is now propofed. Something of this nature might give the merchants of America fuch ma- ritime advantages, that our commerce would lliortly be placed on a refpeclable footing ; we might then exped a beneficial treaty to be formed with Britam, and it is my opinion, that if a decifive difcrimination was made, we fhould fcarcely pafs the ad before offers of that kind would be made. Mr. Jackson. I am in favor of a difcrimination, but I like the idea thrown out by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Madi- fon) that the high duty commence its operation at a diftant day, but I am not for a very great difcrimination ; fome gentlemen who advocate this fide of the queftion have con- tended that Great Britain is obliged to receive certain arti- cles from America ; and therefore if we lay heavy duties tf)i DEBATES A. 178^, upon the tranfportation they will fall iiptirt the conriimer. Now I muft beg leave to mention a fad: or two in point. In the (late of Georgia we have a pretty high toniiage duty* but our produce falls in price. The rice dboilt two or three years ago, fold for 13s. or 14s. now it is difficult to proicdre gs. per cwt. This proves that thefe articles are not fo neceffai'y td the Britilh fubjefts as to induce them to give what we aflc ; therefore the gentlemens arguments go too far, -vvhen they intend to prove that nation altogether dependent upon us. The prices for the fouthern ftaplesji are generally lower than what they were before the v.'ar ; and I am very apprehenfive that a high tonnage will reduce them ftill lower. The tonnage of the ftate of Georgia is about 20,000 tons, of this two- thirds are Britilh—^if the duty is laid fo high as to prevent them from coming anlongft U3 to tranfport our produce, wha^ is to become of the planters ? it is faid that this meafure will raile us into confiderable maritime importance, by making a favorable difcrimination ; I admit that this may eventually take place, with prudent encouragement ; but if before we have got fliipping enough of our own, we dif- card foreigners, we mUtt injure the hulbandmsn, the profits of his labor muft perifli upon his hands, for want of the medns requifite to convey them to market. If the tonnage duty is commenced at a diftaint day, I fliall favor the fuin propofed ; but if it is immediately to take place, I fliould think 20 o'r 2<; fufficient, and even this ought not to take place before December 1790. Though I am a friend to dil'criinination, yet I am oppoied to a high duty, until we have vefi'els enough of our own to anfwer the purpofes of domellic navigation and foreign tranfpor- tation. Mr. Lav7rAnce. I do ftot think the regulation in contemplatiori will em- brace the ob]r:(5l gentlemen have in view. The difcrimi- nation between our own vefl'els and foreigners, is intended to encreafe the quantity of American tonnage. The dif- crimination between foreigners is alfo intended to encreafe the tonnage of our allies. But will this propofed meafure have fuch effed. I think, for my part, that a preference of 20 cents per ton, will not draw velVels belonging to thofe nations into this branch of commerce, fo as to anfwer the purpofe of fupplying the deficiency in our means of tran- fportation, if the preference is fo fmall as not to induce their veflels to iiavi?are for us, the means are not proper-  ; A. 1789. Of C O N G R £ S S. 293 tioned to the end ; but if the regulation is to induce Great Britain to grant us reciprocity in commerce, and our trade is of fuch high importance to that nation, let us adopt mea- fures more effeftual than this fmall difcrimination ; let us fay, that they ihall receive no fiipplies from us but what ^re conveyed to them in ciir own bottoms. The gentleman from Pennfylvania (Mr. Fitzfimons) fays it is not true that the freight will reduce the price to the farmer. He fuppofes the a;rticles of tobacco and rice ne- cefTaries, and whatever price they are held at mult be given for them, and the whole expence fall upon the confiimer to pay. This proves in nay mind too much, and confequently proves nothing. Suppofe we lay 20s. per ton on yeflels, it mud enter into the price of tobacco and rice, and the articles muft ftili be purchafed, yet if the price is encreafed the demand becomes limitted. A man does not co:;fume fo much when the price of an article is high as he does when it is moderate, confequently, if the planter was to get his ufual profit on what was fold, yet he would lofe oii all that remained on hand, owing to the limitation of the demand'. The fame reafoning holds good with relped tc» flax-feed, lumber, and pot-aih ; at the fame time it will be well to confider, Vv^hether the encreafe on the freight will not be fuch as to prevent our fending them altogether. The oil at one time imported into France is reflricled at another. 1 am willing to enter into ftipulations with that tiatiori for the admillion of the article ; but until ibme- thing is done by treaty on this head, there is no fecurity in the temporary regulations made by that or any other nation. I would not be underftood, in my oppofition, to be agiinft difcriminating between ourfelves and foreigners 5 no, Sir^ I admit the policy and propriety of fuch a mcalure but I contend we ought not to difcriminate between foreign nations. As for the cldim of gratitude which hjis been urged, I think it but of fmall weight ; if we are boU'nd, I prefume it is by treaty, and whatever we are fo bound to do I chearfully concur in ; but, if we are free, it never can be deemed want of gratitude to decline doing what will be injurious to our interefts— it is what a nation has' a right to expeft from another, Ths gentlemen lay tliey are forry to difcriminate between Spain and Portugal, they wiili to favor thefe nations, the former has fome claim alfo upon our gratitude; but it is matter of certainty that thole nations will receive an injury by the propofed policy, and n may draw down upon that part of our cQiumerce ver/ B b 194 DEBATES A. 1789.. inconvenient and injurious reftri<flions. But, fay the gen- tlemen, no general principle can be adopted, and at the fame time permit us to except them ; if this be the cafe, why purfue meafures that have this fatal tendency, without any certainty of advantage from another quarter. Great Britain would not enter into a commercial treaty with us, becaufe flie faw we had not power to perform our engagements. If this was the true reafon for her declinhig to form a treaty, there is a high degree of probability^ that now the obje«5lion is removed, Ihe may evince a dif- pofition to be bound to us by a link of that nature which we wifli. Is it prudent then, at this time, to defeat the mea- fure we aim at by a paltry regulation aimed againft her of J5d. per ton ? I conceive it is not, and hope thehoufe yyill rejefl it. Mr. Madison. I believe a few confiderations that lay in a fmall com- pafs, will be fufficient to guide us in our determination on the prefent occafion. Although it is an old maxim, that trade is better left to regulate itlelf ; yet circumftances may and do occur to require legiflative interference ; the principles which have actuated us in laying the duties on feveral articles of impoil are founded upon this neceflity. Our commerce with France and Great Britain, may be confidered in the fame point of view, the one is depreffed beyond what its nature deferves, and the other enhanced beyond its due proportion ; the juftice of this remark is too flagrant to be dilputed. A confiderable quantity of our produce goes thnnigh Great Britain into France^ does not this demouflrate that our commerce flows in an improper channel, and calls loudly on us to give it a different direc- tion. I think the good policy ot foftering the trade of France cannot be doiibted ; we mull make the other nation feel our power to induce her to grant us reciprocal advan- tages. Gentleujen will not contend, that we ought to allow her every thing, and trull to her gratitude, they fay it is a Ilender obligation, for my part I have no hopes from ihat fourcc ; becaufe 1 have all a!ong obferved her feizing to herfelf every advantage in connnerce that prefented to her vie\v by all the ingenuity flie could devife. Gentlemen admit, that we are now in a different fuuation from what we were when flie declined entering into treaty with us, and they expeft Ihe will now come forward with generous offers. But permit me to ails, gentlemen, if it is not the .fame thing whether we want the power or the will to compel A. 1789. Gf C O N G R E S S. 195 tfiem to do Us commercial juftice ? yet do not the gentle- mens arguments tend to create an opinion that we have not the power i they teach hs to be afraid of reprifals. If Hie really believes us to be afraid on this head, will Ihe not act in the manner Ihe has hitherto done when we really did pot poflefs the power? When I hear remarks of this nature, the more convinced I am 6f the necelfity there is of making a difcrimination to convince her of our power, and make her iee th^t her intereft is concerned in being on terms of friendlhip with us, it will be the moft likely way to obtain from her the advantages we contend for — I have no doubt in my own mind but what it will have this effeft. Can it be expeded that Ihe will fhut her ports againft us, when ihe re-exports the greater part of what flie takes from us — inftance tobacco ? will flie refufe to receive this arti- cle^ when fhe does not confume the tenth part of what Ihe carries from the United States ? will llie ihut her ports to the raw materials necelTary for her manufaftures ? I think her dependence, as a commercial and manufafturing na- tion, is fo abiolutely upon us, that it gives a moral certain- ty that her reftridions will not, for her ov/n fake, be prct judicial to our trade. Gentlemen who fear any ill eiFe<R: upon the agricultural