H. OF R.] Tonnage Duty. [FEB. 4, 1829. also to transport their great staples to a market, as cheap- preserve the lading than the vehicle in which it is transly as possible. So, also, the manufacturers of the North ported. A more enlarged and correct view of the suband Middle States must be desirous of receiving their bread ject will enable us to perceive that the salutary effects of stuffs and raw materials, and of sending their fabrics in re- these establishments are not exhausted upon particular turn, without unnecessary obstruction or expense. Not sections of country, or a certain portion of its citizens, only manufacturers and planters, but the farmer, mechan- but are universally diffused. Let me suppose that all the ic, and artizan, nay, every man, who either produces or guides, and beacons, and securities, for entering and departconsumes, buys or sells, any article that is transported in a ing from our rivers and harbors were removed, and that ship, whether coastwise or in the foreign trade, is, in some they were as difficult of access as the Columbia river was degree, benefited by relieving its burthens, and reducing represented, in the recent debate upon the Oregon bill, the rate of freight. where a ship must lie off its mouth some months, before an This is a familiar principle. To facilitate transportation entrance can be effected, and nearly as long within, peris the object of all works of Internal Improvement, whe-haps, before a departure can be hazarded, would not every ther by the States or the Union. Why, then, should we one, who participates in the comforts of civilized society, throw obstructions, and impose tolls upon the great high- by purchasing for his own use, or selling to others, any way which the beneficence of Providence has given us along article of commerce, suffer, from such a condition of our the sea coast, when we are expending millions to create coasting trade? And would it be felt by any more severeartificial communications, by roads and canals, where na-ly than by those of the South? If there was not a single ture has denied them? merchant ship owned in the United States, still we must The gentleman from Georgia stated that this hundred and should have these conveniences, aids, and facilities, so thousand dollars tonnage duty never reached the National long as we have any external commerce. It would, in such Treasury. This is certainly erroneous. It was imposed case, be carried on exclusively in the ships of other nafor revenue; is required by law to be paid into the Trea- tions; but if great and dangerous obstructions existed to sury; and the report of the Secretary every year shows their ingress and egress to and from our harbors, so that that it has always been actually received. But the gentle- the dangers, and delays, and expense of the voyage, were man did not, I presume, mean to be understood literally, doubled, must they not receive, and must we not, as their but only that the expenditures for light houses, buoys, and employers, pay, twice as much for freight and insurance? harbors, upon which he earnestly insisted, exceeded the Sir, if we had no ships, still, as a mere matter of national amount of the receipts from this source. These disburse-economy, we should erect and maintain these necessary ments are made from the mass of the national treasure, facilities to internal and external commerce. But let us, without designation of any particular fund from which for the sake of the argument, assume it to be a correct they shall be drawn. There was, indeed, a law passed principle, that each branch of industry should be requirin 1804, imposing an additional duty of 50 cents the toned to pay, directly, the expenses of fostering and protectupon foreign ships, under the denomination of light mo- ing it, and also that commerce and navigation alone are ney, and which is still in force, and will remain so, unaffect-aided and relieved by these expenditures, which have been ed by the passage of the present bill. so strongly urged against them. Does not the objection, It is insisted that the present tax ought to be continu- then, involve the error of supposing that they do not now ed, because of the amount paid for the benefit of naviga-pay more than the amount of those disbursements, when, tion, in the erection and maintenance of lights, piers, and in truth, they pour millions upon millions annually into your harbors. This objection, at first view, seems entitled to treasury? Hardly a fraction of the national revenue is deconsideration; but it will be found, I think, upon re-rived from any other source; they are the fountains which flection, to involve an error of principle, and a mistake have supplied all your wants, given sustenance to all your of fact. What is the general principle upon which it great institutions, and infused health, vigor, and activity, would rest? Is it not this, that each branch of industry, into the body politic. If, then, we are to keep an account that every national establishment, should directly pay for current, and charge to commerce and navigation the exthe expense of supporting, and the protection extended to penses of their protection and advancement let, us have it? If this be correct, why were the direct taxes and in-the justice to credit to them the moneys which they pay. ternal duties repealed? Are not the expenditures for the If we take so limited a view as not to regard the facilities support of civil government, of the army, the judiciary, of extended to commerce as benefits conferred upon the naalmost all our institutions, intended, primarily, for the tion, let us also confine our views to them as payers of the protection of the soil and the person of the citizen imposts, without inquiring what proportion may eventWhy, then, should we not have a direct imposition upon ually be reimbursed by consumers. If we look not beyond real estate? Why not impose a capitation tax and an ex- the agents, but charge them as recipients of our bouncise upon every species of domestic manufacture, especial-ty, we should also put to their credit the sums derived ly those peculiarly protected? The answer is ready; we from them. can derive sufficient revenue, much more advantageously, The gentleman from Georgia has insisted that there is from other sources. The public welfare is promoted by no branch of industry so lightly taxed as the shipping. I sustaining and encouraging these departments of industry. confess I am at a loss to conceive by what process the genAnd so it may be said, emphatically said, of this. The na- tleman has arrived at such a conclusion. Is agriculture tional wealth, and security, and happiness, are advanced, taxed? Are manufactures taxed? Is there one other by protecting and cherishing your shipping, and reliev- great national employment that is taxed at all? In what ing it from direct taxation. You have other objects in abun- sense, then, can it be said that this is taxed less severely dance, from which you can much better derive revenue than they? Sir, those concerned in navigation pay, every for this and every other expenditure. The true question duty and impost which other portions of the community for the financier to solve, in establishing duties, is, upon bear. The mechanics, laborers, and sailors, employed by what objects can they be imposed most equally, justly, and the ship builder and the ship owner, are great consumers beneficially, for the Union? of articles subjected to imposts-none greater; they pay This objection, of the expenditures for light houses, more than five times as much in duties as the same number beacons, and harbors, must be founded upon the idea of agricultural laborers in the Southern climate. But, bethat they are exclusively for the benefit of ship owners. sides this, ship-owners contribute a vast amount in duties But is not commerce, as distinguished from navigation, upon the materials of ship building. Under the existing vastly more interested in them? inasmuch as the cargo is laws, a ship of three hundred tons burthen pays no less of greater value than the ship, and it is more important to than one thousand one hundred and twenty-six dollars; and FEB. 4, 1829.] Tonnage Duty. [H. or R. Statement, which exhibits the annual reduction of the public debt of the United States, exclusive of the three per cent. stock, on the supposition of twelve millions dollars surplus revenue being applied to that object, and the principal to be liquidated as fast as it is redeemable. the present tonnage of the United States amounts to near-shall hereafter be able to apply twelve millions of dollars, ly six millions. annually, to the principal and interest of the debt. The amount of tonnage which we had on the 31st: Now, as the stocks are not all redeemable at the pleaof December, 1826, would pay, in imposts upon its ma- sure of the Government, nor until the year 1835, the semiterials, by the present laws, five millions seven hundred annual application of six millions of dollars to all, excepting sixty-two thousand four hundred and seventeen dollars. the three per cents. of the Revolution, as fast as they The gentleman has remarked that the tonnage duty has shall become payable, will leave, in the year 1832, a sur-remained without increase or change since the year 1790. plus of nearly three millions, which cannot be applied; That is very true, sir, and it is a grievance that it has so and in 1833, more than nine millions; in 1834, more than continued. It was originally imposed merely for revenue, six millions; and in 1835, above seven millions; making when the necessities of our county imperiously demand- an aggregate exceeding twenty-five millions of dollars, as ed it. Then, just emerging from the protracted and appears by the following desperate struggle of the Revolution, we were in a state of absolute exhaustion, without money or credit, or revenue, and with an immense public debt: every source of income was put in requisition: not only our vessels, but real estate and domestic manufactures were subjected to contribution: since which, in the prosperity of the country, the latter been have relieved, the former has not. Nay, so far from experiencing any alleviation, the burthens of our ships have been aggravated nearly six fold since the year 1790! Then, a vessel of three hundred tons burthen was subjected to duties upon hemp, iron, duck, cordage, &c., only to the amount of one hundred and ninety-seven dollars and thirty-one cents. Now, as already stated, the same ship pays, upon those articles, no less than one thousand one hundred and twenty-six dollars and eighty-cents. Under the law of 1790 the imposts upon the materials for constructing one million five hundred and thirty-four thousand one hundred and ninety tons of shipping, the quantity owned in the United States in 1826 would be one million eight thousand nine hundred and eighty-five dollars, and, under the existing tariff, the enormous sum of five millions seven hundred and sixty-two thousand four hundred and nineteen dollars-an increase of four millions seven hundred and fifty-three thousand four hundred and thirty-two dollars, by successive acts of legislation, since the year 1790! The same quantity of tonnage now contributes, annually, in these duties, more than one million one hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Amount of the public debt, exclusive of Leaves applicable to principal, in 1829, Leaves applicable to principal, in 1830, Deduct interest for 1831, Leaves applicable to principal, in 1831, Deduct interest for 1832, 812,000,000 oc 12,000,000 00 12,000,000 00 45,065,986 33 9,403,965 18 35,661,961 15 9,976,666 66 25,685,254 49 10,517,962 50 15,167,291 99 12,000,000 00 Leaves applicable to principal, in 1832, no redeemable debt, Deduct interest for 1833, Leaves applicable to principal, in 1833, Why were these additional burthens imposed? Was it not for the benefit of agriculture and manufactures? Has not the navigation been oppressed and weighed down to aid the grower of hemp-the iron masters-the makers of duck and cordage? Superadded to all others remains this direct tax, the tonnage duty, from which we now seek relief. And why should it be continued? Why not as well burthen the machinery of manufactures as these vehicles, the machinery of commerce? Why not, with the same justice and expediency, levy a duty of an hundred thousand dollars per annum upon cotton gins, which now pay, in imports upon materials, but a fraction of the amount to which our vessels are subjected. But if a law enforcing such a tax were now proposed, should we not hear, borne upon every breeze from the South, a note of remonstrance louder by far than even that which was raised by the tariff? Far be it from me to assent to such an imposition. I only present it as a parallel case, which may come home to the sensibilities of others. Sir, the true principle which should guide the statesman in matters of Aggregate surplus in 1832, 1833, 1834, finance, is to derive revenue from those sources which are least onerous, most equal, most just, and most beneficial to the community. Surplus of the 12,000,000 which could In 1832, In 1833, And there will be a surplus, in 1834, of 1834, 1835, 9,036,752 38 2,811,412 96 8,204,631 71 6,962,660 28 2,227,363 98 4,735,296 30 18,477,216 79 7,264,703 70 825,741,920 60 The three per cents amount to thirteen millions two hunIt is said that this toll ought to be continued for the pur-dred and ninety-six thousand two hundred and forty-nine pose of discharging the public debt; and that, when that dollars: the highest market price has been eighty-five per shall have been accomplished, we will have a general re- cent. To purchase the whole at that rate would require duction of duties. The national debt is not wholly re- the sum of eleven millions three hundred and one thousand deemable until the year 1835, and if we should reduce eight hundred and twelve dollars; which would be paid our income tenfold as much as this bill proposes, we shall by the above surplus of two millions eight hundred and still have abundant means of paying the whole before that eleven thousand four hundred and twelve dollars, in 1832, period shall arrive. Our finances are in the most pros- and of nine millions thirty-six thousand five hundred and perous and enviable condition. From the last annual re- seventy-two dollars, in 1833; and leave, in the latter year, rt of the Secretary of the Treasury, it appears that we unapplied, the sum of five hundred and forty-six thousand In 1835, will be wanted, only [FEB. 4, 1829. $7,648,860 2,351,130 $10,000,000 three hundred and fifty-two dollars, which, added to the surplus of 1834 and of 1835, will make an aggregate of no less than fourteen millions four hundred and forty thousand one hundred and six dollars, which must remain inapplicable in the years 1833, 1834, and 1835, after the total extinction of the national debt. Subsequent to that period, the Thus, if we now repeal the tonnage duties, still, bewhole annual twelve millions of dollars will be liberated. fore the expiration of the year 1835, the present permaIf it should be thought in any degree doubtful whether nent appropriation to the sinking fund will have wholly the revenue will hereafter yield so much as twelve mil- extinguished the public debt. How are the ten millions lions of dollars, annually, for the discharge of the debt, I of revenue, now annually devoted to our creditors, then will submit a calculation founded upon the amount of ten to be disposed of? Remain idle in your hands it will not. millions dollars only, the sum which is actually appropri- The idea of accumulating treasure for future emergencies, ated by law to the sinking fund; and supposing, also, that in a Government like ours, is vain and illusory. No polithe three per cents are to be paid at par, instead of being tical artist can so construct the vaults of your Treasury as purchased at their market value, and it will appear, that, to prevent its escape. It cannot be permitted to rest in even then, there will be a surplus, in the year 1835, of our coffers. How, then, is it to be disposed of? Shall two millions three hundred and fifty-one thousand one it be expended by the National Government? I confess hundred and thirty dollars, as is fully exhibited by the fol- I should look with fearful forebodings to the day when lowing millions and millions will be soliciting us to appropriate Statement, which shows the manner in which the whole Debt of them according to our pleasure or caprice. Hitherto, the United States may be discharged, by the application of we have been eminently distinguished for the purity and the present annual appropriation of ten millions of dollars-uprightness with which our national finances and disbursethe several Stocks to be paid as they become reimbursable,ments have been conducted. We have been excelled by giving preference to those of the highest rate of interest, been, in some measure, owing to our poverty? During no Government on earth. But may not our purity have and when no other Stock is reimbursable, payments to be applied, first, to the five per cent. subscription to the Bank the whole term of our national existence, we have been of the United States, and next to the three per cent. the scrupulous application of all our means to the disin debt, and public opinion has imperiously demanded stock, &c. charge of the claims of our creditors. Have we not reason to apprehend that the sudden influx of great disposable riches may bring in its train temptations to profusion, extravagance, and profligacy? I wish not to see the time time when ten or twelve millions of dollars shall each year be poured down, as it were, upon that area, to be scrambled for here by the Representatives of the people. I should tremble lest disinterestedness, integrity, and public virtue, should be borne down by selfishness, avarice, and corruption. Year. STOCKS to be Amount of Total Princi- Interest for Stock as it pal to be paid each year. reimbursed must be paid] each year. pr. ct. pay. Dolls. cts. 1829 6 1 July 5,000,000 0 do. 31 Dec 2,414,990 31 Dolls. ets. Dolls. cts. 1830 6 Total paym't Debt. Dolls, ets. 7,414,990 31 2,585,009 69 10,000,000 00 7,859,889 71 2,140,110 29 10,000,000 00 Shall we adopt the proposition to distribute the surplus revenue among the States? This may be less dangerous than expending it ourselves; but why, I ask, should we take money from the people, merely for the purpose of returning it to them again?-or, rather, for the purpose of restoring a part only for the design is to keep up our system of imposts, and, from the amount received, to deduct, first, the expenses of collection, and the losses occasioned by fraud and accident, before it reaches the Treasury; then, the expenses of managing and disbursing it, and the defalcations from negligence or design, causing it to pass through the hands of many agents, to the palm of every one of which some portion will adhere, and then to 8,700,274 93 1,299,725 07 10,000,000 00 return the part that will remain, to the people from whom 8,307,659 43 1,692,340 5710,000,000 00 9,101,041 44 1834 3 1 July 5,000,000 00 31 Dec 4,481,847 27 9,481,847 27 898,958 56 10,000,000 00 it was taken-not, indeed, to the same persons, nor to the same State; that will be impossible. Whatever rule of apportionment may be adopted, the distribution must be unequal, because the payment of duties cannot be in conformity with such rule, but is governed wholly by consumption. Thus, a State, whose citizens should contribute a fifth part of the whole imposts, might receive only one tenth of the sum distributed. The scheme, in effect, is this: Collect ten millions, of which one State, New 518,152 73 10,000,000 00 York, for example, shall have paid two; subtract the expenses and losses, and then distribute the residue, of which the same State, by the ratio adopted, may be enti tled to receive less than one tenth-not half the sum she contributed. I am confident that the gentleman from Georgia, and many others, will doubt the constitutional 152,427 43 7,648,860 12 right in Congress to collect revenue, not for national objects, nor any purpose for which the Federal Government was established, but merely to maintain a system of unequal donations to the several States. Sir, we have but one course to pursue, and that is to re258,362,135 789,286,724 3467,648,860 12 duce taxation. I would do so immediately, to a much great FEB. 4, 1829.] Tonnage Duty. [H. OF R. er amount than is proposed by the present bill. It is en- fuse to grant any, the slightest relief, to the oppressed injoined upon us, by the dictates both of duty and of policy.dustry of the mariner, artisan, and laborer, lest we should We have no moral right to burthen our constituents be- thereby occasion the somewhat longer continuance of the yond what the legitimate objects of the Union demand. I imposts upon the gorgeous apparel, the liquors, and conwould not be niggardly. I would sustain the great institu-diments, of the luxurious? tions of our country upon a firm and extended basis. I would Another reason assigned by the gentleman, why he will exercise true liberality, equally removed from parsimony on not extend relief to navigation, which is acknowledged to the one hand, and profusion on the other. But I would be suffering, is, that the South is burthened-his own contake from the people no more than the necessities of the stituents are depressed. And will he act upon the princiGeneral Government may require. To that extent it is our ple of bringing others down to be companions in misery? duty to go, and to such taxation they will always cheerful- Would he make them wretched, merely because he is so? ly submit, however onerous; but beyond that, they will Would he refuse his aid to extinguish the flames of his not readily acquiesce in any requisitions, although appa- neighbor's house, because his own had been consumed? rently insignificant. You can make no disposition of unne- I forbear to comment upon the moral character of such a cessary revenue, so just and so beneficial to the nation, as rule of action. I know the gentleman too well to believe to leave the fruits of the industry of the citizen in his own that he would deliberately sanction it for a moment. I am hands, and subject to his own control. Your national constrained, then, to suppose that the reason why it is so wealth must consist of the riches of individuals. Your strongly insisted that this interest shall not be relieved untreasury must be the pockets of the people; let them be til others are disburthened, is, that it is wished to keep this replenished by the benign influence of enlightened and pa- measure in reserve, to be given hereafter as an equivalent ternal legislation, and your coffers are always full: you have for others which the gentleman has at heart; that it is detreasures inexhaustible. It is conceded, indeed it cannot signed to make it one of the elements of a legislative combe denied, that there must be a reduction of duties. The bination, by the strength of which, propositions shall be question is, when shall we begin? The gentleman from forced through the House, which never could succeed by Georgia insists that they shall remain untouched until after their individual merits. Sir, in my judgment, such is not the redemption of the public debt, and then be at once re- the course of duty. Let each measure be decided by moved or diminished. But I contend that we should begin its own character; let this bill stand by its own strength, now. Sudden transitions, and great revulsions in trade, or fall by its own weakness. I would not have it upborne are to be avoided. It is desirable that changes in the poli- on the current of legislation by extrinsic and adventitious tical, like those of the natural world, should be effected aid, nor pressed down by foreign weight. by insensible gradations. In conducting the affairs of a We have heard much of retrenching the expenses of great nation, we should at least exercise the moderate Government, and exonerating the people from useless prescience and the common prudence of anticipating and impositions. Gentlemen have now an opportunity of actpreparing for the exigencies which are fast approaching. ing upon those commendable principles, and gratifying But,besides this, is it a correct principle that we should wait their laudable desires. I had hoped that this proposition until we can remove duties from every thing before we would conciliate general support, and unite even those shall relieve any? Is there no choice in the objects of tax-who entertain the most irreconcileable opinions upon other ation? Are we to exercise no judgment, and no discrimi-subjects; that the friends of Internal Improvement would nation? And what are the duties to be repealed, upon perceive that it accorded with their views, and promoted the extinction of the national debt? We have the report of their ardent wishes, by facilitating the communication and a Committee of the Senate, made two years since, contain-internal commerce among the States; and that those who ing a list of articles from which the imposts may then be are conscientiously adverse to the exercise of the power wholly removed, without affecting domestic industry; they of making roads and canals, would unite in dispensing are, wines of all kinds, silks of all kinds, copperas, teas, coffee, salt, cocoa, almonds, currants, prunes, and plums, figs, raisins, mace, cloves, nutmegs, cinnamon, cassia, pepper, pimento, indigo, bristles, Spanish brown and ochre, camphor, Cayenne pepper, ginger, olive oil, alum, corks, quicksilver, opium-30. And upon the following is proposed a reduction of fifty per cent. viz: linens, worsted stuffs, nankeens, bolting cloths, quills, black bottles, demijohns, thread and silk lace, cambric, lawns, Cashmere shawls, gauze, ribbons, straw mats, Canton crapes--15. with an unnecessary and vexatious tax, since the revenue derived from it cannot be required for any purpose which they do not deem an infraction of the constitution. The anti-tariff gentlemen will, I trust, on this occasion, act upon their established principles, of resisting and remov ing all unnecessary taxation; while the friends of domestic industry will, I presume, readily yield some little relief to the greatest of all American manufactures, and eagerly avail themselves of an opportunity to make some slight, very slight atonement, for the burthens imposed and injuries inflicted by them, last year, in the passage of the tariff. Sir, the bill before us will be productive of some good and no evil. It is a measure propitious to the industry of various classes of citizens, and beneficial to the community at large, without involving the hazard of an injury or inconvenience to a single individual. Most of these are mere luxurics; some of them pernicious luxuries. Why, then, should we not now reduce the imposts upon articles of necessity, and continue them so much the longer upon those of a different character? And, if a selection is to be made, what object can bear a comparison with navigation, which ministers to your convenience and necessities in peace, and to your safety, strength, Mr. GILMER again rose. He said that he felt himself and glory, in war? It is our greatest domestic manu- called upon to answer some of the remarks of the gentlefacture. It gives constant employment to more than thirty man from Maine. He had not known that there was any thousand mechanics and laborers, and nearly a hundred thing so vitally important in the bill before the House, and thousand seamen, upon which nearly half a million of per- he was sure there was nothing in the manner of his opposi sons are directly, and a much larger number indirectly, de- tion to it, to authorize the strong expressions of censure pendent for subsistence; thus affording a great and certain which had fallen from that gentleman. Sir, a member of home market for nearly twenty millions of dollars' worth this House should be strongly fortified by the truth of his of the products of the fariner and the manufacturer. And own premises, and the certainty of his own conclusions, shall we deny the small boon that is now asked for this before he attacked, so freely, the opinions of others. great, suffering, national interest-embracing all classes of The gentleman from Maine thought the duty upon toncitizens and every section of our country-until we can re-nage oppressive, and one that it was very desirable that peal the duties upon silks, wines, and spices? Shall we re- the people should be relieved from. Mr. G. thought difVOL. V.-40 H. OF R.] Tonnage Duty. [FEB 4, 1829. ferently. No property, which is taxed at all, paid so littleman knows nothing of the situation of the Southern peotle directly to the Government as our ships. He estimat-ple. When the low price of their agricultural produced the value of the tonnage of the United States at eighty tions had reduced the profits of labor to its lowest state; or ninety millions of dollars, the duty paid by it at one hun- when, from the former high price of produce, the people dred thousand dollars, making one-eighth of one per cen- had incurred large debts, and, from the reduction in the tum upon its capital. Was there any thing in this sum which value of their property, were unable to pay them; it was looked like oppression? The gentleman from Maine also then that the Government imposed upon them a system of considered it as very burthensome in its collection. Now, taxation the most unjust, and unequal, and burthensome, he [Mr. G.] believed that, upon examination, it would that was ever borne by a free people, during a time of be found to be collected with more case, at less cost, by peace and general prosperity. Their complaints had prothe Government, and paid with more convenience by the ceeded from the general distress and ruin inflicted upon ship owners, than any other tax. The Government would them, aggravated by the circumstance that the support be obliged to have the same officers, and incur the same and defence of their country required of them no such saexpense in regulating our navigation, if the duty upon ton- crifice, but that the cupidity of other portions of the peonage was repealed. All vessels would have to be regis- ple had exacted it. Those other portions, though without tered, or licensed, be inspected, have their manifests and sympathy for us, might yet discover from the cause that clearances, in the same manner as at present. He was never fails to carry its full force of conviction, (their intersurprised at the answer this reasoning had received from est) that they had pressed their exactions beyond the point the gentleman from Maine. He said that the collection of profit. If the South be true to itself, he did not doubt it. of the last tariff did not require additional officers for its The gentleman from Maine asked, Why diminish the facollection, any more than the tonnage duty. Why, sir, cilities of navigation upon the occan, when internal comthe last tariff was not intended to add to the receipts of munications were increased at so much expense, in makthe Treasury. It woull be strange, indeed, if a law, de- ing roads and canals? This question, in the first place, signed to lessen the revenue, should increase the cost of was not applicable, because there was no effort to dimincollection. But even that he supposed to be probable, ish navigation. As to the great expenditure for roads and from a late communication from the Executive Depart- canals, he not having voted for them, the gentleman from ment. But the gentleman from Maine said, that, although Maine was referred to another quarter of the House for an the tonnage duty might be light, and collected with ease answer, with this remark, that he did not understand that and cheapness, yet it was a direct tax upon property, and navigation upon the ocean was lessened by increasing the all similar taxes had been long since repealed. Before facilities for bringing heavy productions from the interior this objection could have any weight with the House, it to the Atlantic. The duty upon ships was compared to ought to have been shown that the direct taxes, which one upon wagons, and the House had been asked whethhad been repealed, were similar in other respects. Sir, er one was not as just and equal as the other. The ques[said Mr. G.] a direct tax upon property was, in many re- tion would be answered when the gentleman who made it spects, the cheapest of all taxes to the people. The objec- showed that a tax upon wagons could be collected with tions to it were the expense of the collection to the Govern- the same certainty and cheapness, and paid with the same ment, the difficulty with the people of being prepared for convenience, as that upon ships. its payment, and the patronage which it gave to the Go- Mr. G. said that, in his previous remarks, he had stated vernment, through its numerous officers. The duty upon to the House that the tonnage duty operated as a tax uptonnage had all the advantages which belonged to imports, on the agricultural interest, and the gentleman from Maine and was liable to none of the objections to other direct had added, that it was likewise a tax upon commerce and taxes. The gentleman from Maine had not, however, manufactures; and therefore urged its repeal. Mr. G. shown why its being a direct tax was an objection, except took this to be the true difference between the revenue that the other direct taxes had been repealed. The same system of the gentleman from Maine and himself. His degentleman said that the tonnage duty, though light, was un- sire was to retain such duties as were equal in their opeequal and unjust, and that it was not the magnitude of a tax, ration upon all classes of the community, and the cheapest but the necessity for, and the justice of, its imposition, that and least troublesome in their collection, whilst the gentleman from Maine preferred to have enforced those which It was not sufficient to prove that a tax was unjust, in were unequal and oppressive, and repeal those which opeorder to arrive at the conclusion that it should be repeal-rated equally upon all the great interests of the communied. It must also be shown that it was more unjust than ty. Mr. G. said that, in his previous remarks, he had atall other taxes: for the most unjust ought most assuredly tempted to show that the navigating interest had less reato be the first repealed. Unfortunately for our country, son to complain of burthens than any other of the great there were many, very many, of our duties, which, accord- interests of the community. The gentleman from Maine ing to that rule, would be repealed before the tonnage had thought proper to say, in reference to those remarks, duty. From the strong expressions of complaint which that he was mistaken in fact and principle. The use of had fallen from the gentleman from Maine, it might be such terms called for a special answer. supposed that this was some new imposition which the Government was about to lay upon the ship owners. How was the fact? The present duty of six cents upon the ton had been imposed in 1790, and had been continued ever since. It had the sanction of the wisdom and experience of all those who had gone before us. Mr. G. said that he was himself but resisting innovation upon our established revenue system. Perhaps the gentleman from Maine would himself be willing, upon a little reflection, to retract his charge of iniquity and ignorance against all those who have hitherto administered the Government. should determine its continuance. The gentleman from Maine, in illustrating his position that it was not the magnitude of a tax, but its necessity, that ought to determine its continuance, had referred to the people of the South as having been more excited by the inequality of the tariff than its oppression. The gen The whole duty paid by the entire tonnage of the United States amounted annually to the sum of one hundred thousand dollars, as he had already stated. There was appropriated, during the last session of Congress, for the erection of light-houses, the building of piers, the placing of buoys, the improving of harbors, and removing obstructions in rivers, and making a breakwater, nine hundred and twenty-three thousand dollars; making the appropriations for the benefit of navigation near ten times the sum of duties received. One improvement alone, designed for the security of vessels navigating the Delaware, he did not doubt would cost the Government more than the revenue derived from tonnage would repay in fifty years. In what, then, did his mistake in fact consist? The mistake in principle had been about equally well supported. It consisted in this, as stated by the gentleman from Maine, that |