صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

vice versa, and by the more determinate appropriation of the revenue. The first object to which it ought to be applied was, he thought, the foreign debt. This object claimed a preference, as well from the hope of facilitating further aids from that quarter, as from the disputes into which a failure may embroil the United States. The prejudices against making a provision for foreign debts which should not include the domestic ones, was, he thought, unjust, and might be satisfied by immediately requiring a tax, in discharge of which loan-office certificates should be receivable. State funds, for the domestic debts, would be proper for subsequent consideration. He added, as a further objection against crediting the States for the duties on trade respectively collected by them, that a mutual jealousy of injuring their trade by being foremost in imposing such a duty would prevent any from making a beginning.

Mr. WILLIAMSON said, that Mr. RUTLedge's motion, at the same time that it removed some objections, introduced such as would be much more fatal to the measure. He was sensible of the necessity of some alterations, particularly in its duration, and the appointment of the collectors. But the crediting the States, severally, for the amount of their collections, was so palpably unjust and injurious, that he thought candor required that it should not be persisted in. He was of opinion that the interest of the States which trade for others also required it, since such an abuse of the advantage possessed by them would compel the States for which they trade to overcome the obstacles of nature, and provide supplies for themselves. North Carolina, he said, would proba

bly be supplied pretty much through Virginia, if the latter forbore to levy a tax on the former; but in case she did not forbear, the ports of North Carolina, which are nearly as deep as those of Holland, might, and probably would, be substituted. The profits drawn by the more commercial States from the business they carry on for the others, were of themselves sufficient, and ought to satisfy them.

Mr. RAMSAY differed entirely from his colleague, Mr. RUTLEDGE. He thought that, as the consumer pays the tax, the crediting the States collecting the impost was unjust. North Carolina, Maryland, New Jersey, and Connecticut, would suffer by such a regulation, and would never agree to it.

Mr. BLAND was equally against the regulation. He thought it replete with injustice, and repugnant to every idea of finance. He observed, that this point had been fully canvassed at the time when the impost. was originally recommended by Congress, and finally exploded. He was, indeed, he said, opposed to the whole motion of Mr. RUTLEDGE. Nothing would be a secure pledge to creditors that was not placed out of the control of the grantors. As long as it was in the power of the States to repeal their grants in this respect, suspicions would prevail, and would prevent loans. Money ought to be appropriated by the States as it is by the Parliament of Great Britain. He proposed that the revenue to be solicited from the States should be irrevocable by them without the consent of Congress, or of nine of the States. He disapproved of any determinate limitation to the continuance of the revenue, because the continuance of the debt could not be fixed, and that was the only rule that 40

VOL. I.

could be proper or satisfactory. He said he should adhere to these ideas in the face of the act of Virginia repealing her assent to the impost; that it was trifling with Congress to enable them to contract debts, and to withhold from them the means of fulfilling their

contracts.

Mr. LEE said, he seconded the motion of Mr. RUTLEDGE, because he thought it most likely to succeed; that he was persuaded the States would not concur in the impost on trade without a limitation of time. affixed to it. With such a limitation, and the right of collection, he thought Virginia, Rhode Island, and the other States, probably would concur. The objection of his colleague, Mr. BLAND, he conceived to be unfounded. No act of the States could be irrevocable, because, if so called, it might, notwithstanding, be repealed. But he thought there would be no danger of a repeal, observing that the national faith was all the security that was given in other countries, or that could be given. He was sensible that something was, of necessity, to be done in the present alarming crisis, and was willing to strike out the clause crediting the States for their respective collections of the revenue on trade, as it was supposed that it would impede the

measure.

Mr. HAMILTON disliked every plan that made but partial provision for the public debts, as an inconsistent and dishonorable departure from the declaration made by Congress on that subject. He said the domestic creditors would take the alarm at any distinctions unfavorable to their claims; that they would withhold their influence from any such measures recommended by Congress; and that it must be principally from

their influence on their respective Legislatures, that success could be expected to any application from Congress for a general revenue.

THURSDAY, JANUARY 30TH.

The answer to the memorials from the Legislature of Pennsylvania was agreed to as it stands on the Journal, New Jersey alone dissenting.

In the course of its discussion, several expressions were struck out which seemed to reprehend the States for the deficiency of their contributions. In favor of these expressions it was urged that they were true, and ought to be held forth as the cause of the public difficulties, in justification of Congress. On the other side it was urged that Congress had, in many respects, been faulty as well as the States, particularly, in letting their finances become so disordered before they began to apply any remedy; and that if this were not the case, it would be more prudent to address to the States a picture of the public distresses and danger, than a satire on their faults; since the latter would only irritate them, whereas the former would tend to lead them into the measures supposed by Congress to be essential to the public

interest.

The propriety of mentioning to the Legislature of Pennsylvania the expedient into which Congress had been driven, of drawing bills on Spain and Holland without previous warrant; the disappointment attending it, and the deductions ultimately ensuing from the aids

destined to the United States by the Court of France, was also a subject of discussion. On one side, it was represented as a fact which, being dishonorable to Congress, ought not to be proclaimed by them, and that in the present case it could answer no purpose. On the other side, it was contended that it was already known to all the world; that, as a glaring proof of the public embarrassments, it would impress the Legislature with the danger of making those separate appropriations which would increase the embarrassments; and particularly would explain, in some degree, the cause of the discontinuance of the French interest due on the loan-office certificates.

Mr. RUTLEDGE, and some other members, having expressed less solicitude about satisfying or soothing the creditors within Pennsylvania, through the Legislature, than others thought ought to be felt by every one, Mr. WILSON, adverting to it with some warmth, declared that if such indifference should prevail, he was little anxious what became of the answer to the memorials. Pennsylvania, he was persuaded, would take her own measures without regard to those of Congress, and that she ought to do so. She was willing, he said, to sink or swim according to the common fate, but that she would not suffer herself, with a mill-stone of six millions of the Continental debt about her neck, to go to the bottom alone.

* He supposed that sum due, by the United States, to citizens of Pennsylvania, for loans.

« السابقةمتابعة »