justice cannot be done to the creditors of the United States, nor the restoration of public credit be effected, nor the future exigencies of the war provided for, but by the establishment of general funds to be collected by Congress."

This motion was seconded by Mr. FITZSIMMONS.

Mr. BLAND desired that Congress would, before the discussion proceeded further, receive a communication of sundry papers transmitted to the Virginia Delegates by the Executive of that State, two of which had relation to the question before Congress. These were, first, a resolution of the General Assembly, declaring its inability to pay more than fifty thousand pounds, Virginia currency, towards complying with the demands of Congress; secondly, the act repealing the act granting the impost of five per cent. These papers were received and read.

Mr. WOLCOTT expressed some astonishment at the inconsistency of these two acts of Virginia; supposed that they had an unfavorable aspect on the business before Congress, and proposed that the latter should be postponed for the present. He was not seconded.

Mr. GORHAM favored the general idea of the motion, animadverting on the refusal of Virginia to contribute the necessary sums, and at the same moment repealing her concurrence in the only scheme that promised to supply a deficiency of contributions. He thought the motion, however, inaccurately expressed, since the word "general" might be understood to refer to every possible object of taxation, as well as to the operation of a particular tax throughout the States. He observed, that the non-payment of the

one million two hundred thousand dollars demanded by Congress, for paying the interest of the debts for the year demonstrated that the constitutional mode of annual requisitions was defective; he intimated that lands were already sufficiently taxed, and that polls and commerce were the most proper objects. At his instance, the latter part of the motion was so amended as to run "establishment of permanent and adequate funds to operate generally throughout the United States."

Mr. HAMILTON went extensively into the subject; the sum of it was as follows: he observed, that funds considered as permanent sources of revenue, were of two kinds, first, such as would extend generally and uniformly throughout the United States, and would be collected under the authority of Congress; secondly, such as might be established separately within each State, and might consist of any objects which were chosen by the States, and might be collected either under the authority of the States or of Congress. Funds of the first kind, he contended, were preferable; as being, first, more simple, the difficulties attending the mode of fixing the quotas laid down in the Confederation rendering it extremely complicated, and in a manner insuperable; secondly, as being more certain, since the States, according to the said plan, would probably retain the collection of the revenue, and a vicious system of collection prevailed generally throughout the United States, a system by which the collectors were chosen by the people, and made their offices more subservient to their popularity than to the public revenue; thirdly, as being more economical, since

the collection would be effected with fewer officers under the management of Congress than under that of the States.

Mr. GORHAM observed, that Mr. HAMILTON Was mistaken in the representation he had given of the collection of taxes in several of the States, particularly in that of Massachusetts, where the collection was on a footing which rendered it sufficiently certain.

Mr. WILSON, having risen to explain something which had fallen from him, threw out the suggestion that several branches of the revenue, if yielded by all the States, would perhaps be more just and satisfactory than any single one; for example, an impost on trade combined with a land tax.

Mr. DYER expressed a strong dislike to a collection by officers appointed under Congress, and supposed the States would never be brought to consent to it.

Mr. RAMSAY was decidedly in favor of the proposition. Justice, he said, entitled those who had lent their money and services to the United States to look to them for payment; that if general and certain revenues were not provided, the consequence would be that the army and public creditors would have soon to look to their respective States only for satisfaction; that the burden in this case would fall unequally on the States; that rivalships relative to trade would impede a regular impost, and would duce confusion among the States; that some of the States would never make, of themselves, provision for half-pay, and that the army would be so far defrauded of the rewards stipulated to them by Congress; that although it might be uncertain whether the States would accede to plans founded on the proposition 37

VOL. I.

pro

before the House, yet, as Congress was convinced of its truth and importance, it was their duty to make the experiment.

Mr. BLAND thought, that the ideas of the States on the subject were so averse to a general revenue in the hands of Congress, that if such a revenue were proper it was unattainable; that as the deficiency of the contributions from the States proceeded, not from their complaints of their inability,* but of the inequality of the apportionments, it would be a wiser course to pursue the rule of the Confederation, to wit, to ground the requisition on an actual valuation of lands; that Congress would then stand on firm ground, and try a practicable mode.

TUESDAY, JANUARY 28TH.

The subject yesterday under discussion was resumed. A division of the question was called for by Mr. WOLCOTT, so as to leave a distinct question on the words "to be collected by Congress," which he did not like.

Mr. WILSON considered this mode of collection as essential to the idea of a general revenue, since, without it, the proceeds of the revenue would depend entirely on the punctuality, energy, and unanimity of the States, the want of which led to the present consideration.

Mr. HAMILTON was strenuously of the same opinion.

*The papers just read, from Virginia, complained of her inability without mentioning an inequality. This was deemed a strange assertion.

Mr. FITZSIMMONS informed Congress that the Legislature of Pennsylvania had, at their last meeting, been dissuaded from appropriating their revenue to the payment of their own citizens, creditors of the United States, instead of remitting it to the Continental Treasury, merely by the urgent representations of a Committee of Congress, and by the hope that some general system in favor of all the public creditors would be adopted; that the Legislature were now again assembled, and, although sensible of the tendency of such an example, thought it their duty, and meant, in case the prospect of such a system vanished, to proceed immediately to the separate appropriations formerly in contemplation.

On the motion of Mr. MADISON, the whole proposition was new-modelled, as follows:

"That it is the opinion of Congress that the establishment of permanent and adequate funds, to operate generally throughout the United States, is indispensably necessary for doing complete justice to the creditors of the United States, for restoring public credit, and for providing for the future exigencies of the war." The words "to be collected under the authority of Congress," were, as a separate question, left to be added afterwards.

Mr. RUTLEDGE objected to the term "generally," as implying a degree of uniformity in the tax which would render it unequal. He had in view particularly a land tax, according to quality, as had been proposed by the Office of Finance. He thought the prejudices of the people opposed the idea of a general tax; and seemed, on the whole, to be disinclined to it himself, at least if extended beyond an impost on trade; urg