Philadelphia is certainly, in appearance, the most wealthy and imposing
city in the Union. It is well built, and ornamented with magnificent
public edifices of white marble; indeed there is a great show of this
material throughout the whole of the town, all the flights of steps to
the doors, door-lintels, and window-sills, being very generally composed
of this material. The exterior of the houses, as well as the side
pavement, are kept remarkably clean; and there is no intermixture of
commerce, as there is at New York, the bustle of business being confined
to the Quays, and one or two streets adjoining the river side.
The first idea which strikes you when you arrive at Philadelphia, is
that it is Sunday: every thing is so quiet, and there are so few people
stirring; but by the time that you have paraded half a dozen streets,
you come to a conclusion that it must be Saturday, as that day is,
generally speaking, a washing-day. Philadelphia is so admirably
supplied with water from the Schuykill water-works, that every house has
it laid on from the attic to the basement; and all day long they wash
windows, door, marble step, and pavements in front of the houses.
Indeed, they have so much water, that they can afford to be very liberal
to passers-by. One minute you have a shower-bath from a negress, who is
throwing water at the windows on the first floor; and the next you have
to hop over a stream across the pavement, occasioned by some black
fellow, who, rather than go for a broom to sweep away any small portion
of dust collected before his master's door, brings out the leather hose,
attached to the hydrants, as they term them here, and fizzes away with
it till the stream has forced the dust into the gutter.
Of course, fire has no chance in this city. Indeed, the two elements
appear to have arranged that matter between them; fire has the ascendant
in New York, while water reigns in Philadelphia. If a fire does break
out here, the housekeepers have not the fear of being _burnt_ to death
before them; for the water is poured on in such torrents, that the
furniture is washed out of the windows, and all that they have to look
out for, is to escape from being drowned.
The public institutions, such as libraries, museums, and the private
cabinets of Philadelphia, are certainly very superior to those of any
other city or town in America, Boston not excepted. Every thing that is
undertaken in this city is well done; no expense is spared, although
they are not so rapid in their movements as at New York: indeed the
affluence and ease pervading the place, with the general cultivation
which invariably attend them, are evident to a stranger.
Philadelphia has claimed for herself the title of the most aristocratic
city in the Union. If she refers to the aristocracy of wealth, I think
she is justified; but if she would say the aristocracy of family, which
is much more thought of by the few who can claim it, she must be content
to divide that with Boston, Baltimore, Charlestown, and the other cities
which can date as far back as herself. One thing is certain, that in no
city is there so much fuss made about lineage and descent; in no city
are there so many cliques and sets in society, who keep apart from each
other; and it is very often difficult to ascertain the grounds of their
distinctions. One family will live at No. 1, and another at No. 2 in
the same street, both have similar establishments, both keep their
carriages, both be well educated, and both may talk of their
grandfathers and grandmothers; and yet No. 1 will tell you that No. 2 is
nobody, and you must not visit there; and when you enquire why? there is
no other answer, but that they are not of the right sort. As long as a
portion are rich and a portion are poor, there is a line of demarcation
easy to be drawn, even in a democracy; but in Philadelphia, where there
are so many in affluent circumstances, that line has been effaced, and
they now seek an imaginary one, like the equinoctial, which none can be
permitted to pass without going through the ceremonies of perfect
ablution. This social contest, as may be supposed, is carried on among
those who have no real pretensions; but there are many old and
well-connected families in Philadelphia, whose claims are universally,
although perhaps unwillingly, acknowledged.
I doubt if the claims of Boston to be the most scientific city in the
Union, can be now established. I met a greater number of scientific men
in Philadelphia than I did in Boston; and certainly the public and
private collections in the former city are much superior. The
collection of shells and minerals belonging to Mr Lee, who is well
known as an author and a naturalist, is certainly the most interesting I
saw in the States, and I passed two days in examining it: it must have
cost him much trouble and research.
The Girard College, when finished, will be a most splendid building. It
is, however, as they have now planned it, incorrect, according to the
rules of architecture, in the number of columns on the sides in
proportion to those in front. This is a great pity; perhaps the plan
will be re-considered, as there is plenty of time to correct it, as well
as money to defray the extra expense.
The water-works at Schuykill are well worth a visit, not only for their
beauty, but their simplicity. The whole of the river Schuykill is
dammed up, and forms a huge water-power, which forces up the supply of
water for the use of the city. As I presume that river has a god as
well as others, I can imagine his indignation, not only at his waters
being diverted from his channel, but at being himself obliged to do all
the work for the benefit of his tyrannical masters.
I have said that the museums of Philadelphia are far superior to most in
the States; but I may just as well here observe, that, as in many other
things, a great improvement is necessary before they are such as they
ought to be. There is not only in these museums, but in all that I have
ever entered in the United States, a want of taste and discrimination,
of that correct feeling which characterises the real lovers of science,
and knowledge of what is worthy of being collected. They are such
collections as would be made by school-boys and school-girls, not those
of erudite professors and scientific men. Side by side with the most
interesting and valuable specimens, such as the fossil mammoth,
etcetera, you have the greatest puerilities and absurdities in the
world--such as a cherry-stone formed into a basket, a fragment of the
boiler of the Moselle steamer, and Heaven knows what besides. Then you
invariably have a large collection of daubs, called portraits, of
eminent personages, one-half of whom a stranger never heard of--but that
is national vanity; and lastly, I do not recollect to have seen a museum
that had not a considerable portion of its space occupied by most
execrable wax-work, in which the sleeping beauty (a sad misnomer)
generally figures very conspicuously. In some, they have models of
celebrated criminals in the act of committing a murder, with the very
hatchet or the very knife: or such trophies as the bonnet worn by Mrs
-- when she was killed by her husband; or the shirt, with the blood of
his wife on it, worn by Jack Sprat, or whoever he might be, when he
committed the bloody deed. The most favourite subject, after the
sleeping beauty in the wax-work, is General Jackson, with the battle of
New Orleans in the distance. Now all these things are very well in
their places: exhibit wax-work as much as you please--it amuses and
interests children; but the present collections in the museums remind
you of American society--a chaotic mass, in which you occasionally meet
what is valuable and interesting, but of which the larger proportion is
pretence.
It was not until I had been some time in Philadelphia that I became
convinced how very superior the free coloured people were in
intelligence and education, to what, from my knowledge of them in our
West-India Islands, I had ever imagined them capable of. Not that I
mean to imply that they will ever attain to the same powers of intellect
as the white man, for I really believe that the race are not formed for
it by the Almighty. I do not mean to say that there _never_ will be
great men among the African race, but that such instances will always be
very _rare_, compared to the numbers produced among the white. But this
is certain, that in Philadelphia the free coloured people are a very
respectable class, and, in my opinion, quite as intelligent as the more
humble of the free whites. I have been quite surprised to see them take
out their pencils, write down and calculate with quickness and
precision, and in every other point shew great intelligence and
keenness.
In this city they are both numerous and wealthy. The most extravagant
funeral I saw in Philadelphia was that of a black; the coaches were very
numerous, as well as the pedestrians, who were all well dressed, and
behaving with the utmost decorum. They were preceded by a black
clergyman, dressed in his full black silk canonicals. He did look very
odd, I must confess.
Singular is the degree of contempt and dislike in which the free blacks
are held in all the free States of America. They are deprived of their
rights as citizens; and the white pauper, who holds out his hand for
charity (and there is no want of beggars in Philadelphia), will turn
away from a negro, or coloured man, with disdain. It is the same thing
in the Eastern States, notwithstanding their religious professions. In
fact, in the United States, a negro, from his colour, and I believe his
colour alone, is a degraded being. Is not this extraordinary, in a land
which professes universal liberty, equality, and the rights of man? In
England this is not the case. In private society no one objects to sit
in company with a man of colour, provided he has the necessary education
and respectability. Nor, indeed, is it the case in the Slave States,
where I have frequently seen a lady in a public conveyance with her
negress sitting by her, and no objection has been raised by the other
parties in the coach; but in the Free States a man of colour is not
admitted into a stage coach; and in all other public places, such as
theatres, churches, etcetera, there is always a portion divided off for
the negro population, that they may not be mixed up with the whites.
When I first landed at New York, I had a specimen of this feeling.
Fastened by a rope yarn to the rudder chains of a vessel next in the
tier, at the wharf to which the packet had hauled in, I perceived the
body of a black man, turning over and over with the ripple of the waves.
I was looking at it, when a lad came up: probably his curiosity was
excited by my eyes being fixed in that direction. He looked, and
perceiving the object, turned away with disdain, saying, "Oh, it's only
a nigger."
And all the Free States in America respond to the observation, "It's
only a nigger." [See note 1.] At the time that I was at Philadelphia a
curious cause was decided. A coloured man of the name of James Fortin,
who was, I believe, a sailmaker by profession, but at all events a
person not only of the highest respectability, but said to be worth
150,000 dollars, appealed because he was not permitted to vote at
elections, and claimed his right as a free citizen. The cause was
tried, and the verdict, a very lengthy one, was given by the judge
against him, I have not that verdict in my possession; but I have the
opinion of the Supreme Court on one which was given before, and I here
insert it as a curiosity. It is a remarkable feature in the tyranny and
injustice of this case, that although James Fortin was not considered
white enough (he is, I believe, a mulatto) to _vote_ as a citizen, he
has always been quite white enough to be _taxed_ as one, and has to pay
his proportion, (which, from the extent of his business, is no trifle)
of all the rates and assessments considered requisite for the support of
the poor, and improving and beautifying that city, of which he is
declared not to be a citizen.
Although the decision of the Supreme Court enters into a lengthened
detail, yet as it is very acute and argumentative, and touches upon
several other points equally anomalous to the boasted freedom of the
American institutions, I wish the reader would peruse it carefully, as
it will amply repay him for his trouble; and it is that he _may_ read
it, that I have not inserted it in an Appendix.
The question arose upon a writ of error to the judgment of the Common
Pleas of Luzerne county, in an action by Wm. Fogg, a negro, against
Hiram Hobbs, inspector, and Levi Baldwin and others, judges of the
election, for refusing his vote. In the Court below the plaintiff
recovered. The Supreme Court being of opinion that a negro has not a
right to vote under the present constitution, reversed the judgment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Respectfully, FRED. WATTS.
"Wm. Fogg _versus_ Hiram Hobbs and others.
"The opinion of the Court was delivered by Gibson, CJ.
"This record raises, a second time, the only question on a phrase in the
Constitution which has occurred since its adoption; and, however
partisans may have disputed the clearness and precision of phraseology,
we have often been called upon to enforce its limitations of legislative
power; but the business of interpretation was incidental, and the
difficulty was not in the diction, but in the uncertainty of the act to
which it was to be applied. I have said a question on the meaning of a
phrase has arisen a second time. It would be more accurate to say the
_same_ question has arisen the second time. About the year 1795, as I
have it from James Gibson, Esquire, of the Philadelphia bar, the very
point before us was ruled by the High Court of Errors and Appeals
against the right of negro suffrage. Mr Gibson declined an invitation
to be concerned in the argument, and therefore has no memorandum of the
cause to direct us to the record. I have had the office searched for
it; but the papers had fallen into such disorder as to preclude a hope
of its discovery. Most of them were imperfect, and many were lost or
misplaced. But Mr Gibson's remembrance of the decision is perfect, and
entitled to full confidence. That the case was not reported, is
probably owing to the fact that the judges gave no reasons; and the
omission is the more to be regretted, as a report of it would have put
the question at rest, and prevented much unpleasant excitement. Still,
the judgment is not the less authoritative as a precedent. Standing as
the court of last resort, that tribunal bore the name relation to this
court that the Supreme Court does to the Common Pleas; and as its
authority could not be questioned then, it cannot be questioned now.
The point, therefore, is not open to discussion on original grounds.
"But the omission of the judges renders it proper to show that their
decision was founded in the true principles of the constitution. In the
first section of the third article it is declared, that `in elections by
the citizens, every _freeman_ of the age of twenty-one years, having
resided in the State two years before the election, and having within
that time paid _a state or county tax_,' shall enjoy the rights of an
elector. Now, the argument of those who assert the claim of the
coloured population is, that a negro is a _man_; and when not held to
involuntary service, that he is free, consequently that he is a
_freeman_; and if a freeman in the common acceptation of the term, then
a freeman in every acceptation of it. This pithy and syllogistic
sentence comprises the whole argument, which, however elaborated,
perpetually goes back to the point from which it started. The fallacy
of it is its assumption that the term `freedom' signifies nothing but
exemption from involuntary service; and that it has not a legal
signification more specific. The freedom of a municipal corporation, or
body politic, implies fellowship and participation, of corporate rights;
but an inhabitant of an incorporated place, who is neither servant nor
slave, though bound by its laws, may be no freeman in respect to its
government. It has indeed been affirmed by text writers, that
habitance, paying scot and lot, give an incidental right to corporate
freedom; but the courts have refused to acknowledge it, even when the
charter seemed to imply it; and when not derived from prescription or
grant, it has been deemed a qualification merely, and not a title.
(_Wilcox_, chap. iii. p. 456.) Let it not be said that the legal
meaning of the word freeman is peculiar to British corporations, and
that we have it not in the charters and constitutions of Pennsylvania.
The laws agreed upon in England in May 1682, use the word in this
specific sense, and even furnish a definition of it: `Every inhabitant
of the said province that is, or shall be, a purchaser of one hundred
acres of land or upwards, his heirs or assigns, and every person who
shall have paid his passage, and shall have taken up one hundred acres
of land, at a penny an acre, and have cultivated ten acres thereof; and
every person that hath been a servant or bondsman, and is free by his
service, that shall have taken up his fifty acres of land, and shall
have cultivated twenty thereof; and every inhabitant, artificer, or
other resident in the said province, that pays scot and lot to the
government, _shall be deemed and accounted a *freeman* of the said
province_; and every such person shall be capable of electing, or being
elected, representatives of the people in provincial council, or general
assembly of the said province.' Now, why this minute and elaborate
detail? Had it been intended that all but servants and slaves should be
freemen to every intent, it had been easier and more natural to say so.
But it was not intended. It was foreseen that there would be
inhabitants, neither planters nor taxable, who, though free as the
winds, might be unsafe depositories of popular power; and the design
was, to admit no man to the freedom of the province who had not a stake
in it. That the clause which relates to freedom by service was not
intended for manumitted slaves is evident, from the fact that there were
none; and it regarded not slavery, but limited servitude expired by
efflux of time. At that time, certainly, the case of a manumitted
slave, or of his free-born progeny, was not contemplated as one to be
provided for in the founder's scheme of policy: I have quoted the
passage, however, to show that the word freeman was applied in a
peculiar sense to the political compact of our ancestors, resting like a
corporation, on a charter from the crown; and exactly as it was applied
to bodies politic at home. In entire consonance, it was declared in the
Act of Union, given at Chester in the same year, that strangers and
foreigners holding land `according to the law of a freeman,' and
promising obedience to the proprietary, as well as allegiance to the
crown, `shall be held and reputed freemen of the province and counties
aforesaid;' and it was further declared, that when a foreigner `shall
make his request to the governor of the province _for the aforesaid
freedom_, the same person shall be _admitted_ on the conditions herein
expressed, paying twenty shillings sterling, and no more:'--modes of
expression peculiarly appropriate to corporate fellowship. The word in
the same sense pervades the charter of privileges, the act of
settlement, and the act of naturalisation, in the preamble to the last
of which it was said, that some of the inhabitants were `foreigners and
not freemen, according to the acceptation of the laws of England;' it
held its place also in the legislative style of enactment down to the
adoption of the present constitution; after which, the words `by and
with the advice and consent of the freemen,' were left out, and the
present style substituted. Thus, till the instant when the phrase on
which the question turns was penned, the term freeman had a peculiar and
specific sense, being used like the term citizen, which supplanted it,
to denote one who had a voice in public affairs. The citizens were
denominated freemen even in the constitution of 1776; and under the
present constitution, the word, though dropped in the style, was used in
legislative acts, convertible with electors, so late as the year 1798,
when it grew into disuse. In an act passed the 4th of April in that
year for the establishment of certain election districts, it was, for
the first time, used indiscriminately with that word; since when it has
been entirely disused. Now, it will not be pretended, that the
legislature meant to have it inferred, that every one not a freeman
within the purview, should be deemed a slave; and how can a convergent
intent be collected from the same word in the constitution, that every
one not a slave is to be accounted an elector? Except for the word
citizen, which stands in the context also as a term of qualification, an
affirmance of these propositions would extend the right of suffrage to
aliens; and to admit of any exception to the argument, its force being
derived from the supposed universality of the term, would destroy it.
Once concede that there may be a freeman in one sense of it, who is not
so in another, and the whole ground is surrendered. In what sense,
then, must the convention of 1790 be supposed to have used the term?
questionless in that which it had acquired by use in public acts and
legal proceedings, for the reason that a dubious staite is to be
expounded by usage. `The meaning of things spoken and written, must be
as hath been constantly received.' (Vaugh. 169.) On this principle, it
is difficult to discover how the word freeman, as used in previous
public acts, could have been meant to comprehend a coloured race: as
well might it be supposed, that the declaration of universal and
unalienable freedom in both our constitutions was meant to comprehend
it. Nothing was ever more comprehensively predicted, and a practical
enforcement of it would have liberated every slave in the State; yet
mitigated slavery long continued to exist among us, in derogation of it.
Rules of interpretation demand a strictly verbal construction of
nothing but a penal statute; and a constitution is to be construed still
more liberally than even a remedial one, because a convention
legislating for masses, can do little more than mark an outline of
fundamental principles, leaving the interior gyrations and details to be
filled up by ordinary legislation. `Conventions intended to regulate
the conduct of nations,' said Chief Justice Tilghman, in the Farmers'
Bank versus Smith, 3 Sergt. and Rawl. 69, `are not to be construed like
articles of agreement at the common law. It is of little importance to
the public, whether a tract of land belongs to A or B. In deciding
these titles, strict rules of construction may be adhered to; and it is
best that they should be adhered to, though sometimes at the expense of
justice. But where multitudes are to be affected by the construction of
an amendment, great regard is to be paid to the spirit and intention.'
What better key to these, than the tone of antecedent legislation
discoverable in the application of the disputed terms.
"But in addition to interpretation from usage, this antecedent
legislation furnishes other proofs that no coloured race was party to
our social compact. As was justly remarked by President Fox, in the
matter of the late contested election, our ancestors settled the
province as a community of white men, and the blacks were introduced
into it as a race of slaves, whence an unconquerable prejudice of caste,
which has come down to our day, insomuch that a suspicion of taint still
has the unjust effect of sinking the subject of it below the common
level. Consistently with this prejudice, is it to be credited that
parity of rank would be allowed to such a race? Let the question be
answered by the statute of 1726, which denominated it an idle and a
slothful people; which directed the magistrates to bind out free negroes
for laziness or vagrancy; which forbade them to harbour Indian or
mulatto slaves, on pain of punishment by fine, or to deal with negro
slaves, on pain of stripes; which annexed to the interdict of marriage
with a white, the penalty of reduction to slavery; which punished them
for tippling with stripes, and even a white person with servitude for
intermarriage with a negro. If freemen, in a political sense, were
subjects of these cruel and degrading oppressions, what must have been
the lot of their brethren in bondage? It is also true, that degrading
conditions were sometimes assigned to white men, but never as members of
a caste. Insolvent debtors, to indicate the worst of them, are
compelled to make satisfaction by servitude; but that was borrowed from
a kindred, and still less rational, principle of the common law. This
act of 1726, however, remained in force, till it was repealed by the
Emancipating Act of 1789; and it is irrational to believe, that the
progress of liberal sentiments was so rapid in the next ten years,--as
to produce a determination in the convention of 1790 to raise this
depressed race to the level of the white one. If such were its purpose,
it is strange that the word chosen to effect it should have been the
very one chosen by the convention of 1776 to designate a white elector.
`Every freeman,' it is said, (chap. 2, sect. 6,) `of the full age of
twenty-one years, having resided in this State for the space of one
whole year before the day of election, and paid taxes during that time,
shall enjoy the rights of an elector.' Now, if the word freeman were
not potent enough to admit a free negro to suffrage under the first
constitution, it is difficult to discern a degree of magic in the
intervening plan of emancipation sufficient to give it potency, in the
apprehension of the convention, under the second.
"The only thing in the history of the convention which casts a doubt
upon the intent, is the fact, that the word _white_ was prefixed to the
word freeman in the report of the committee, and _subsequently struck_
out--probably because it was thought superfluous, or still more
probably, because it was feared that respectable men of dark complexion
would often be insulted at the polls, by objections to their colour. I
have heard it said, that Mr Gallatin sustained his motion to strike out
on the latter ground. Whatever the motive, the disseverence is
insufficient to wrap the interpretation of a word of such settled and
determinate meaning as the one which remained. A legislative body
speaks to the judiciary, only through its final act, and expresses its
will in the words of it; and though their meaning may be influenced by
the sense in which they have usually been applied to extrinsic matters,
we cannot receive an explanation of them from what has been moved or
said in debate. The place of a judge is his forum--not the legislative
hall. Were he even disposed to pry into the motives of the members, it
would be impossible for him to ascertain them; and, in attempting to
discover the ground on which the conclusion was obtained, it is not
probable that a member of the majority could indicate any that was
common to all; previous prepositions are merged in the act of
consummation, and the interpreter of it must look to that alone.
"I have thought it fair to treat the question as it stands affected by
our own municipal regulations, without illustration from those of other
States, where the condition of the race has been still less favoured.
Yet it is proper to say, that the second section of the fourth article
of the Federal Constitution presents an obstacle to the political
freedom of the negro, which seems to be insuperable. It is to be
remembered that citizenship, as well as freedom, is a constitutional
qualification; and how it could be conferred, so as to overbear the
laws, imposing countless disabilities on him in other States, is a
problem of difficult solution. In this aspect, the question becomes
one, not of intention, but of power; so doubtful, as to forbid the
exercise of it. Every man must lament the necessity of the
disabilities; but slavery is to be dealt with by those whose existence
depends on the skill with which it is treated. Considerations of mere
humanity, however, belong to a class with which, as judges, we have
nothing to do; and, interpreting the constitution in the spirit of our
own institutions, we are bound to pronounce that men of colour are
destitute of title to the elective franchise: their blood, however, may
become so diluted in successive descent, as to lose its distinctive
character; and then both policy and justice require that previous
disabilities should cease. By the amended constitution of North
Carolina, no free negro, mulatto, or free person of mixed blood,
descended from negro ancestors to the fourth generation inclusive,
_though one ancestor of each generation may have been a white person_,
shall vote for the legislature. I regret to say, no similar regulation,
for practical purposes, has been attempted here; in consequence of
which, every case of disputed colour must be determined by no particular
rule, but by the discretion of the judges; and thus a great
constitutional right, even under the proposed amendments of the
constitution, will be left the sport of caprice. In conclusion, we are
of opinion the court erred in directing that the plaintiff could have
his action against the defendant for the rejection of his vote.
Judgment reversed."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
It will be observed by those who have had patience to read through so
long a legal document, that reference is made to the unjust prejudice
against any taint of the African blood. There is an existing proof of
the truth of this remark, in the case of one of the most distinguished
members of the House of Representatives. This gentleman has some
children who are not of pure blood; but, to his honour, he has done his
duty by them, he has educated them, and received them into his house as
his acknowledged daughters. What is the consequence? Why, it is
considered that by so doing he has outraged society; and whenever they
want to raise a cry against him, this is the charge, and very injurious
it is to his popularity,--"that he has done his duty as a father and a
Christian."
"Captain Marryat, we are a very moral people!"
The laws of the State relative to the intermarriage of the whites with
the coloured population are also referred to. A case of this kind took
place at New York when I was there; and as soon as the ceremony was
over, the husband, I believe it was, but either the husband or the wife,
was seized by the mob, and put under the pump for half an hour. At
Boston, similar modes of expressing public opinion have been adopted,
notwithstanding that that city is the stronghold of the abolitionists.
It also refers to the white slavery, which was not abolished until the
year 1789. Previous to that period, a man who arrived out, from the old
continent, and could not pay his passage, was put up to auction for the
amount of his debt, and was compelled to serve until he had worked it
out with the purchaser. But not only for the debt of passage-money, but
for other debts, a white man was put up to auction, and sold to the best
bidder. They tell a curious story, for the truth of which I cannot
vouch, of a lawyer, a very clever but dissipated and extravagant man,
who, having contracted large debts and escaped to New Jersey, was taken
and put up to auction; a keen Yankee purchased him, and took him
regularly round to all the circuits to plead causes, and made a very
considerable sum out of him before his time expired.
I have observed that Mr Fortin, the coloured man, was considered quite
white enough to pay taxes. It is usually considered in this country,
that by going to America you avoid taxation, but such is not the case.
The municipal taxes are not very light. I could not obtain any very
satisfactory estimates from the other cities, but I gained thus much
from Philadelphia.
The assessments are on property.
City Tax, 70 cents upon the 100 dollars valuation.
County Tax, 65 cents upon ditto.
_Poor's_ Rate, 40 cents.
Taxes on Horses, 1 dollar each.
Taxes on Dogs, half a dollar each.
_Poll_ Tax, from a quarter dollar to 4 dollars each person.
It is singular that such a tax as the _poll_ tax, that which created the
insurrection of Wat Tyler in England, should have forced its way into a
democracy. In the collection of their taxes, they are quite as summary
as they are in England. This is the notice:
"You are hereby informed, that your property is included in a list of
delinquents now preparing, and will be advertised and sold for the
assessments due thereon. (This being the last call.)
"Your immediate attention will save the costs of advertising, sale,
etcetera.
"-- Collector.
"Collector's Office, Number 1, State of --."
It is a strange fact, and one which must have attracted the reader's
notice, that there should be a poor's rate in America, where there is
work for every body; and still stranger that there should be one in the
city of Philadelphia, in which, perhaps, there are more beneficent and
charitable institutions than in any city in the world of the same
population: notwithstanding this there are many mendicants in the
street. All this arises from the advantage taken of an unwise
philanthropy in the first place, many people preferring to live upon
alms in preference to labour; and next from the state of destitution to
which many of the emigrants are reduced after their arrival, and before
they can obtain employment. Indeed, not only Philadelphia, but
Baltimore and New York, are equally charged for the support of these
people--the two first by legal enactment, the latter by voluntary
subscription. And it is much to the credit of the inhabitants of all
these cities that the charge is paid cheerfully, and that an appeal is
never made in vain.
But let the Americans beware: the poor rate at present is trifling--40
cents in the 100 dollars, or about 1.75 pence in the pound; but they
must recollect, that they were not more in England about half a century
back, and see to what they have risen now! It is the principle which is
bad. There are now in Philadelphia more than 1,500 paupers, who live
entirely upon the public, but who, if relief had not been continued to
them, would, in all probability, by this time, have found their way to
where their labour is required. The Philadelphians are proverbially
generous and charitable; but they should remember that in thus yielding
to the dictates of their hearts, they are sowing the seeds of what will
prove a bitter curse to their posterity. See note 2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1. "On the whole, I cannot help considering it a mistake to
suppose that slavery has been abolished in the Northern States of the
Union. It is true, indeed, that in these States the power of compulsory
labour no longer exists; and that one human being within their limits
can no longer claim property in the thews and sinews of another. But is
this all that is implied in the boon of freedom? if the word mean
anything, it must mean the enjoyment of equal rights, and the unfettered
exercise in each individual of such powers and faculties as God has
given. In this true meaning of the word, it may be safely asserted that
this poor degraded class are still slaves--they are subject to the most
grinding and humiliating of all slaveries, that of universal and
unconquerable prejudice. The whip, indeed, has been removed from the
back of the negro; but the chains are still upon his limbs, and he bears
the brand of degradation on his forehead. What is it but the mere abuse
of language to call him _free_, who is tyrannically deprived of all the
motives to exertion which animate other men? The law, in truth, has
left him in that most pitiable of all conditions--_a masterless
slave_."--_Hamilton's Men and Manners in America_.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 2. Miss Martineau, who is not always wrong, in her remarks upon
pauperism in the United States, observes:--"The amount, altogether, is
far from commensurate with the charity of the community; and it is to be
hoped that the curse of a legal charity will be avoided in a country
where it certainly cannot become necessary within any assignable time.
I was grieved to see the magnificent Pauper Asylum near Philadelphia,
made to accommodate, luxuriously, 1,200 persons; and to have its
arrangements pointed out to me, as yielding more comforts to the inmates
than the labourer could secure at home by any degree of industry and
prudence."