On motion, it was

_Resolved_, That a committee be appointed, to join with

such committee as the Senate may appoint, to confer on the

disagreeing votes of the two Houses, upon the report of

their joint committee, appointed to consider what titles

shall be given to the President and Vice President of the

United States, if any other than those given in the

constitution.

Messrs. MADISON, PAGE, BENSON, TRUMBULL, and SHERMAN were the committee

elected.

_Impost Bill._

The House then went into a Committee of the Whole on the bill for laying

a duty on goods, wares, and merchandises imported into the United

States. Mr. PAGE in the chair.

The question on laying a duty on molasses being under consideration:

Mr. TUCKER.--Notwithstanding I am anxious for a reduction of the duties

on all the articles in the bill, yet my vote on molasses will be

regulated by what the committee shall determine in other cases, as I do

not conceive it to be out of proportion. If a general reduction takes

place on the other articles, I shall be disposed to make a reduction on

this article; but as mine is but a single vote, gentlemen may not be

inclined to favor my proposition for a general reduction in order to

gain my assent to a reduction on this particular article.

Mr. GOODHUE was of opinion that the duties were too high for collection;

but he did not agree with the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. TUCKER)

that the duty on molasses was rated in proportion to the other articles,

and therefore the question, whether molasses shall be reduced or not,

did not depend on a general reduction, but on its own bottom; if it was

rated too high for collection and proportion, the committee would agree

to reduce it.

Mr. FITZSIMONS expected the gentleman from South Carolina would vote in

the manner he had pledged himself; he had promised to vote for reducing

the duty on molasses if the committee reduced the duty on other

articles; now, as they had decided against a reduction, he hoped the

gentleman would be in favor of the duty on molasses, as it stood in the

bill, and not vote in the manner he had promised.

Mr. TUCKER.--The gentleman last up has certainly misunderstood me. I

made no promise. I said my vote would depend upon the reduction of the

other articles, but I was indifferent as to rum; I did not consider the

State I represented as being either particularly benefited or injured by

a duty on rum; and therefore did not urge any arguments in favor of

reducing that article, more than I thought it might be proper to

preserve the ratio, as fixed by the House, between the several articles.

If gentlemen think rum can bear a high duty, and be safely collected, I

have no objection to letting it remain. But there are some articles that

bear heavily and unequally upon South Carolina; now, I think it my duty

to vote in such a manner as to prevent her from bearing an undue

proportion of the tax to be collected; I am, consequently, obliged to

vote for a high tax on articles used in other States, (if my State is

highly taxed,) however unequally it may fall. I shall therefore vote so

as to endeavor to oblige other States to bear their true proportion of

the aggregate sum. I wish to defer any determination on the article of

molasses until we have gone through the other articles, that I may know

how to vote on this. If gentlemen think my single vote of no

consequence, they may proceed; but I may think the duty too high on

molasses, and may be disposed to make it five cents, or less, if a

reduction is made in the other articles; but I would not be understood

to pledge myself for any particular sum.

Mr. AMES thought the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. FITZSIMONS) had

misunderstood the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. TUCKER) respecting

his pledging himself to vote in favor of molasses. He believed the

gentleman from South Carolina incapable of making any improper

accommodation either on this or any other occasion; the subject had

never been mentioned to him, nor he believed to any body else, much less

could the gentleman's intention be the result of bargain or compromise.

For his own part, he would never consent to such a degradation of his

rights as a member of the House, as to stipulate for the exercise of his

opinion.

Mr. TUCKER.--If the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. FITZSIMONS)

supposes that I have bargained to vote for or against any measure, he

does me wrong; and if he charges me with such actions, I desire he may

state his reasons and explain himself. I did not hear perfectly what he

said when he was up before, and therefore did not refute any improper

construction he might have put on my arguments.

Mr. FITZSIMONS had no difficulty in declaring his meaning. He understood

when the article of rum was under consideration, that the gentleman held

out a promise to vote for the reduction of the duty on molasses, if the

committee would agree with him in reducing generally. This promise was

not made in a private manner; it was made by the gentleman in his place.

He could not recite the particular expression of the gentleman, but he

understood from it that the gentleman pledged himself to reduce the duty

on molasses, if the gentlemen from the Eastern States would join him in

a general reduction.

Mr. TUCKER.--I expressed a wish for a general reduction to take place

throughout the whole system; but I never made a promise with regard to a

reduction of any particular article.

Mr. SENEY observed, that the discussion of molasses had been deferred

when the subject was last before the House, in order to give time for a

full investigation; but he conceived that no such reason now existed, in

favor of its lying over, and therefore hoped the House would proceed to

decide upon it.

Mr. AMES was willing to proceed to the consideration of that subject; he

did not wish it deferred to the end of the list, that it might be held

over them _in terrorem_. There were several articles in the list, which

he did not conceive to be taxed too high for collection, or out of

proportion with others, therefore it was likely they would not be

reduced. If this was the case, the reduction would not be general, and

the gentleman from South Carolina might not think it his duty to favor

the reduction of molasses. He wished every article to stand upon its own

bottom. If molasses was too high, the committee would lower it; if not,

they will continue it at the rate it is, and the business would be done

with. If the committee were disposed to proceed, he was ready to take up

the subject.

Mr. CARROLL saw no reason for postponing the business at this time. When

the subject was suspended on a former occasion, several gentlemen from

Massachusetts were absent on business, but it was surely unnecessary now

to have any delay. After the repeated discussions it had undergone, he

was satisfied gentlemen were prepared for a decision, and he hoped the

question might be taken, and the committee proceed to get through the

business. Gentlemen should consider the daily loss which the revenue

sustained by the delay of this bill; he cautioned them against

considering overmuch, and letting slip the opportunity they now had to

supply the public wants.

Mr. WADSWORTH would not go over the old ground, and enumerate all the

reasons why a reduction of the duty on this article should take place.

He satisfied himself with saying it was out of proportion, and too high

ever to be collected with certainty; he wished the committee to lower it

to three or four cents, and apply to an excise for the deficiency, not

conceiving an excise on distilled spirits to be inconvenient or

unpopular.

Mr. AMES was sensible that any further discussion of the present subject

was unpleasant, nay, it was painful to the committee; but he had such

impressions on his mind with regard to its importance, that he must

trespass on them again. On all subjects demonstration is desirable, but

there is only one science capable of complete demonstration. Many other

sciences admit of different degrees of demonstration; but of all the

sciences on earth, the science of politics is the least capable of

affording satisfactory conclusions, while it is the one that, from its

importance, requires the greatest degree of certainty; because when we

are to consider those things which relate to the welfare of nations, it

is of consequence, and nothing can be more desirable than that we adopt

just principles in order to come at proper conclusions. In this science

it is dangerous to adopt the visionary projects of speculators instead

of principle. We ought to be cautious, therefore, in selecting the

information upon which we form our system.

He trusted to make it appear in the course of his arguments, that the

propriety of the particular measure under discussion depended upon local

knowledge, and yet it would be found of national concern. He believed it

could be clearly proved to be as much the interest of one part as of

another to have the duty reduced.

It was laid down as a principle that all duties ought to be equal. He

believed, if gentlemen gave themselves time for consideration, they

would not contend this duty was equal. He said he had made some

calculations, which demonstrated the inequality to a very surprising

degree. The tax operated in two ways: first, as a tax on a raw material,

which increased the price of stock and narrowed the sale; and second, as

a tax on an article of consumption. It required the distillation and the

consumption to be equal in every part of the Union to render the duty

equal in its operation; but no gentleman contended that the consumption

or distillation was equal. The gentleman from Virginia said, on a former

occasion, that Massachusetts would not contribute her proportion of the

national revenue, because her exports were not equal to the Southern

States, and of consequence her imports are less; but if this fact is

examined, it will be found that she does export in full proportion with

the Southern States. Examine her custom-house books, and you will find

it; but Massachusetts is greatly concerned in navigation, and the wages

of her seamen ought to be added to the amount of the profits of her

industry. Then if we consider her consumption, we shall find it in

proportion also. Admitting the people of New England to live more

moderate than the opulent citizens of Virginia or Carolina, yet they

have not such a number of blacks among them, whose living is wretched;

consequently, the average consumption per head will be nearly the same.

The fact is, that all taxes of this nature will fall generally in

proportion to the ability to pay.

Laying a heavy duty on molasses incurs the necessity of allowing a

drawback on country rum. By this system, we may lose more revenue than

we gain; anyhow, it will render it very uncertain. It is a question of

some importance, whether it would not be beneficial to the United States

to establish a manufacture which would be very lucrative. But waiving

that consideration, he would ask gentlemen, if there was any propriety

in taxing molasses in its raw state, with a duty intended to be laid on

rum? Certainly this had better be by way of excise. In this mode the

revenue would escape fraud by smuggling, which would otherwise be

unavoidable. The tax was such a temptation, being thirty per cent. upon

its value, that no checks could prevent a clandestine trade being

carried on.

Without the molasses trade is continued, the fishery cannot be carried

on. They are so intimately connected, that the weapon which wounds the

one will stab the other. If by such measures as these we ruin one of the

most valuable interests of the United States, will not the people have a

right to complain that, instead of protecting, you injure and destroy

their pursuits? He did not mean to say that the people would form

unwarrantable combinations; but their exertions to support the

Government will be damped; they will look with chagrin on the

disappointment of their hopes; and it will add to their vexation that

they have been deceived under the most flattering appearances; for who

could conceive that a Government, constructed and adopted in the manner

this has been, could ever be administered to the destruction of that

welfare which it was formed to support?

He recommended experience as the best guide, and said, that it was

decidedly against high duties, particularly on molasses; and concluded

with appealing to the justice and wisdom of the committee for a

determination on this subject.

Mr. CARROLL would not take up the time of the committee with saying a

word on the main subject, but begged them to consider of how much

importance it was to the Union to get this bill into operation. If every

article was to be again debated in the manner it had already been, he

could see no end to the business. Unless gentlemen could advance some

new and weighty arguments, he thought the time misspent in

recapitulating those that had been unsuccessfully urged twice or three

times before.

Mr. MADISON thought the arguments against the duty were inconsistent. He

believed the gentlemen in opposition had not replied to an observation

he had made, and which was of great force on his mind. The gentlemen all

say that a heavy duty will ruin the distilleries and fisheries, and the

people concerned in them; yet they profess themselves willing to lay the

same duty, but in two forms instead of one. Now he would be glad to know

if the distilleries and fisheries would not be precisely in the same

situation, let which would take place?

On motion, the committee rose, and the House adjourned.

TUESDAY, May 12.

_Duties on Imports._

The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. PAGE

in the chair, on the Impost Bill.

The article of molasses being still under consideration:

Mr. AMES wished to reply to the observation made yesterday by the

gentleman from Virginia. Does that gentleman, said he, recollect, if we

lay an excise, we prevent the burthen from being imposed upon the poor

for their subsistence, as molasses, in the raw state, will be lightly

taxed? In the next place, it is more favorable to the importers of that

article than the impost; it does not require so large a proportion of

their capital to be advanced in payment of duties, nor do they run the

risk of bad debts, because it may be so regulated that the retailer

shall secure the duty. Another reason is, it will save the expense of a

numerous host of custom-house officers, tide-waiters, &c. These

considerations proved, that if the excise was no better than an impost,

it was no worse; and as the duty would be better collected, and give

less reason for smuggling, which, above all things, was dangerous to the

revenue, it was sufficient to warrant the committee in giving the excise

duty a preference.

Mr. GOODHUE would not trouble the House long on the subject; but begged

leave to repeat the manner in which the molasses trade was connected

with the fisheries, and the fisheries with the navigation; that, if the

first is injured, the other two are wounded through its side. About

three-fifths of all the fish that are put up for that market, are of an

inferior quality, and would not sell elsewhere. The French would not

permit us to carry them there, but because we take their molasses in

exchange; they will not let their colonies send the molasses to France,

lest it interfere with their brandy. Now, any impediment to the

exportation of molasses, will prevent the exportation of fish; if we

cannot export the fish, for what purpose shall we continue our

fisheries? And if they are given up, how are we to form seamen to man

our future navy?

Mr. MADISON said his mind was incapable of discovering any plan that

would answer the purpose the committee have in view, and not produce

greater evils than the one under consideration. He thought an excise

very objectionable, but as no actual proposition for entering into such

a system was before the committee, he forbore to say any thing further

about it. He admitted an excise would obviate in part some of the

difficulties; but he did not think the answer given to his argument

altogether satisfactory; yet there was another argument he urged on a

former occasion remaining unanswered--it was, that, at this moment, the

fisheries, distilleries, and all their connections, were laboring under

heavier duties than what is now proposed; true, the duty is collected in

a different mode, but it affects the consumer in the same manner. The

gentlemen have said, to be sure, that the duty is evaded; but if half is

collected, it amounts to more than six cents per gallon.

It is said that a tax on molasses will be unpopular, but not more so

than a tax on salt. Can gentlemen state more serious apprehensions in

the former than the latter case? yet the committee did not forego a

productive fund, because the article was a necessary of life, and in

general consumption. If there is the disposition that is represented for

people to complain of the oppression of Government, have not the

citizens of the Southern States more just ground for complaint than

others? The system can only be acceptable to them, because it is

essentially necessary to be adopted for the public good.

Gentlemen argue, that a tax on molasses is unpopular, and prove it by

experience under the British Government. If this is to be adduced as a

proof of the popularity of a measure, what are we to say with respect to

a tax on tea? Gentlemen remembered, no doubt, how odious this kind of

tax was thought to be throughout America; yet the House had, without

hesitation, laid a considerable duty upon it. He did not imagine that a

duty on either of those articles was in itself objectionable; it was the

principle upon which the tax was laid that made them unpopular under the

British Government.

It is said that this tax is unjust; now, he had not a single idea of

justice, that did not contradict the position. If it be considered as it

relates to rum, he was certain the consumers of foreign rum paid a

larger proportion of revenue into the Treasury than the consumers of

country rum; they paid more than equal distributive justice required; if

it was considered as it respected molasses, there would appear no

injustice. Molasses was consumed in other States; but if it was not,

sugar was used in its stead, and subjected to a duty full as high as

that on molasses. But dismissing both these considerations, and even

admitting the whole weight to fall upon the Northern States, it would

not be disproportioned, because, in the long list of enumerated articles

subject to a high duty, they imported few or none; indeed, the articles

were pretty generally taxed for the benefit of the manufacturing part of

the northern community; see loaf sugar, candles, cheese, soap, &c. He

hoped gentlemen would not infer from this observation, that he thought

the encouragement held out by the bill to manufactures improper; far

from it; he was glad to see their growing consequences, and was disposed

to give them every aid in his power. From this view of the subject, he

was inclined to adhere to the bill, and not make any reduction.

Mr. GERRY hoped the committee would not consider the subject as finally

decided; he thought it deserving of further investigation, and expected

the committee would be satisfied of the propriety of making some

reduction. He felt a concern at being obliged to extend the discussion,

but his duty impelled him to oppose a measure he conceived injurious to

his country.

Gentlemen had contended, that a duty of six cents per gallon on molasses

was just and equal; for his part, he could not discover, with all the

exertions his mind was capable of making, how gentlemen prove this to be

the case; it appeared to him partial and oppressive.

The principle laid down in the constitution for an equal distribution of

taxes was, that they shall be apportioned among the several States,

according to their respective number of inhabitants. This principle is

made positive as it respects direct taxes; but he thought the equality

ought to extend itself to every possible case. The power possessed by

the House, with regard to revenue and the power of making all necessary

laws, enabled the General Government to exist independent of subordinate

associations; but if they were inclined to annihilate the State

Governments, yet it would be their interest to attend to the advantages

of the community, and administer their power so as not to make it

burthensome and oppressive. Now, he wished to know, what principle of

justice authorized the committee to lay a duty of six cents on molasses?

Unfortunately for Massachusetts, she imports a greater quantity than the

whole Union besides. This makes her interest stand alone, and her

representatives are left to labor the point, knowing the ill effect it

will have upon their constituents. Under these circumstances, it is

necessary to pay particular attention to the justice of the measure;

gentlemen should consider that, in such cases, there is danger of

interest prevailing over equity and policy. Certainly, if the measure is

pursued, we shall discover this effect in the end.

Gentlemen have considered the arguments brought against this duty as

standing upon local ground, advocating the local interest of

Massachusetts. He would examine this position. It is the interest of a

majority of the people of that State, that as much revenue should be

drawn from molasses as possible. I say it is the interest of the State,

for their interest is divided between the landed and commercial; the

landed interest predominates, and it was always supposed that the

commercial bore a greater share of the public burthen than it ought. The

conduct of the State of Massachusetts ought to be esteemed by us as the

best guide to discover how far our commercial regulations, as they

respect that State, are consistent with policy, if she furnishes the

best example. Can we find that she ever imposed a duty of six cents per

gallon on molasses? Not a single instance can be produced where she

raised revenue from this article. If they then never laid a duty upon

it, and they were disposed to get every thing in their power from

commerce, we must conclude that if it could have been laid they would

have done it. It is not the landed citizens, if he might use the term,

who consume molasses; it is the inhabitants of the sea-coast; the former

had the power, and they were interested to lay such a tax, it might

therefore be expected they would have done it, if they had not been

convinced it would have destroyed the fisheries and navigation of the

State.

The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. MADISON) cannot see how an impost on

molasses can affect the distilleries and fisheries. After having been

repeated over and over again, it would be unnecessary that he should

dwell on this point. But every one could see the connection; if we do

not import molasses, we cannot carry on our distilleries nor vend our

fish; and it will be impossible to import molasses under such heavy

duties; at least the future importation will be limited to two-thirds of

the present, because the demand will be in proportion to the increase of

price, and the merchant will not have capital to import more than

two-thirds of his usual quantity.

He would not reiterate the arguments respecting the fisheries; it was

well known to be the best nursery for seamen, the United States had no

other, and it never could be the intention of gentlemen to leave the

navigation of the Union to the mercy of foreign powers. It is of

necessity, then, that we lay the foundation of our maritime importance

as soon as may be, and this can be done only by encouraging our

fisheries. It is also well known that we have a number of rivals in this

business desirous of excluding us from the fishing banks altogether.

This consideration of itself is sufficient to induce a wise legislature

to extend every encouragement to so important a concern. In any

regulation they make, by which it can be effected, they ought to be sure

of the ground on which they go.

It appeared to him that six cents would have the most ruinous

consequences to the general interest; he therefore hoped gentlemen would

agree to reduce it, if not so as to place it among the _ad valorem_

articles, at least down to two cents. However, as the committee are not

prepared to say the particular sum proper to be laid, he hoped they

would agree to leave it a blank, to be filled up at some future stage of

the business.

The question was now taken on striking out six cents, and passed in the

affirmative: ayes 24, noes 22.

Propositions were severally made for filling up the blank with two,

three, four, and five cents; five being the highest was first put and

agreed to--ayes 25, noes 23.

The committee proceeded to consider the subsequent articles; but not

having time to go through the whole, they rose, and reported progress,

and the House adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, May 13.

The petition of John Fitch, of Pennsylvania, was presented, stating that

he is the original discoverer of the principle of applying steam-power

to the purposes of navigation, and has obtained an exclusive right

therein for a term of years, in the States of Virginia, Delaware,

Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, and praying that his rights may

be secured to him by law, so as to preclude subsequent improvers upon

his principle from participation therein, until the expiration of his

granted right. Referred to a committee, consisting of Messrs.

HUNTINGTON, CADWALADER, and CONTEE, to report thereon.

_Duties on Imports._

The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the

Impost Bill, Mr. PAGE in the chair.

Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856, Vol. 1 (of 16) · 第 43 / 242 题