H. OF R. War Taxes. FEBRUARY, 1812. YEAS-Willis Alston, jr., William Anderson, Stev- M. Troup, Charles Turner, jr., Robert Whitehill, Wm. NAYS-John Baker, Abijah Bigelow. Harmanus The question was next taken on the third resolution, laying additional tonnage duties, and carried, 82 to 40, as follows:, YEAS-Willis Alston, jr., William Anderson, Stevenson Archer, Ezekiel Bacon, David Bard, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Adam Boyd, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, Matthew Clay, James Cochran, Lewis Condit, William Crawford, Roger Davis, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Earle, William Findley, James Fisk, Meshack Franklin, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, John A. Harper, Aylett Hawes, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Peter Little, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, George C. Maxwell, Thomas Moore, William McCoy, Samuel McKee, Alexander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, James Morgan, Jeremiah Morrow, Hugh Nelson, Anthony New, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, William Piper, James Pleasants, jr., Benjamin Pond, Peter B. Porter, William M. Richardson, Samuel Ringgold, John Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, William Rodman, Ebenezer Sage, Ebenezer Seaver, John Sevier, Adam Seybert, John Smilie, Geo. Smith, John Smith, Silas Stow, George Sullivan, George Mr. M. CLAY hoped the House would not concur with the committee in the adoption of this resolution, as its operation would be very unequal; for nearly the whole duty would be paid by the middle country, by about one-third of the people of the United States, as the people on the seaboard had no occasion to use this article for their cattle, and the inhabitants of the Western country, he understood, got their salt for ten cents a bushel. Mr. STANFORD joined Mr. CLAY in his opposition to this resolution. After a few remarks from Mr. SEYBERT and Mr. NEWTON in favor of the tax, the House adjourned, without taking the question. FRIDAY, February 28. The SPEAKER laid before the House a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting a statement of the gross and net amount of the customs of the United States, in obedience to a resolution of the House, of the eleventh ultimo; which were read, and ordered to lie on the table. The bill from the Senate "for the establishment of a General Land Office in the Department of the Treasury" was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Public Lands. The House proceeded to consider the amendments of the Senate to the bill "to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury, under the direction of the President of the United States, to purchase of Winslow Lewis his patent right to the new and improved method of lighting light-houses, and for other purposes;" and the amendments were concurred in by the House. Manual of Parliamentary Practice was about to Mr. BASSETT, observed, that a new edition of the be published in this city; and as he believed no book could be placed in the Library that would be more useful to members of Congress, he had prepared a resolution proposing to authorize the Clerk to subscribe for as many copies as might appear sufficient for the use of the number of new members which might at any time be in the House. It was in the following words: "Resolved, That the Clerk of this House be authorized to subscribe with Joseph Milligan and William Cooper for copies of a new edition of Jefferson's Manual, provided they annex thereto the standing rules and orders of this House, to be paid for out of the contingent fund, and the books placed in the Library, for the use of Congress. The blank was filled with fifty, and the resolution agreed to. WAR TAXES. The House than resumed the consideration of the report of the Committee of the Whole on the subject of taxes; when the 4th resolution, proposing a tax on salt, being under consideration, Mr. STANFORD rose again to oppose this tax, on the ground of its being unjust and unequal, operating principally upon a particular portion of the Union. The inhabitants on the seaboard had not the same necessity of using it for their cattle, and on some parts of the coast manufactories of salt are established; and the people to the westward had also salt manufactories. The State of Ohio had been particularly favored by Congress in this respect, having had the salt-licks given to them at the time that State was formed. Mr. SMILIE said, the salt-licks had not been given to the State of Ohio, without a consideration. They were, in return, to suffer all lands belonging to the United States to be exempt from taxation. Mr. BLACKLEDGE was in favor of the tax, as it would serve to encourage the manufacture of salt in our own country, which, in case of war, would be very desirable. He did not believe that the people on the seacoast, or in the Western country. got their salt any cheaper than the inhabitants of the midland country, except such as lived near a manufactory. Mr. STANFORD moved to amend the resolution, by adding a duty of ten cents on all salt manufactured in this country. This motion was advocated by Messrs. STANFORD, MACON, WRIGHT, CLAY, GHOLSON, and WIDGERY; and opposed by Messrs. BLACKLEDGE, KING, PORTER STOW, LACOCK, TRACY, GRUNDY, and CALHOUN. H. of R. encourage manufactures of every kind, but, more especially, of such articles as cannot be obtained from abroad in time of war. It was well known that this country suffered considerably during the Revolution for want of salt; but now, with proper encouragement, a sufficiency might be furnished from our own establishments. Besides, if this additional tax were to be imposed on salt, it would raise the price still higher to the consumers, as eventually every tax is paid by them. The business of taxation ought to be considered in the spirit of accommodation; the salt tax would bear a little hard on one part of the country, the impost and tonuage duty on another, the spirit tax on another, the carriage and stamp tax on another, and the direct taxes on others. It would be impossible to get taxes to bear equally on all. It was believed that if the system was taken together it would operate as equally as any other that could be produced. The question was taken on agreeing to this tax of ten cents a bushel on domestic salt, and negatived-yeas 22, nays 96, as follows: YEAS-Stevenson Archer, David Bard, Martin Chittenden, Matthew Clay, James Cochran, William Crawford, Asa Fitch, Meshack Franklin, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Nathaniel Macon, George C. Maxwell, Thomas Moore, Archibald McBryde, William McCoy, Joseph Pearson, Israel Pickens, John Randolph, John Smith, Richard Stanford, Benjamin Tallmadge, and Robert Wright. NAYS Willis Alston, jun., William Anderson, Ezekiel Bacon, John Baker, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, Abijah Bigelow, William Blackledge, Harmanus Bleecker, Adam Boyd, James Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Epaphroditus Champion, Langdon Cheves, Lewis Condit, Roger Davis, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Earle, William Ely, James Emott, William Findley, Thomas R. Gold, Charles Goldsborough, Edwin Gray, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, John A. Harper, Aylett Hawes, Jacob Hufty, Richard Jackson, jun., Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, WilBy the advocates of the amendment it was liam R. King, Abner Lacock, Lyman Law, Joseph urged that, if salt imported paid a duty of twenty Lefever, Joseph Lewis, jun., Peter Little, Robert Le cents a bushel, the manufacturers of salt in this Roy Livingston, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, Samcountry might very well afford to pay a tax of uel McKee, Alexander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, Samhalf that sum, as they would then have an advan-uel L. Mitchill, James Morgan, Jeremiah Morrow, tage of ten cents per bushel over foreign salt; that there would be as much propriety in taxing domestic salt as domestic spirits; that this tax was laid for the purpose of raising revenue, and manufacturers of domestic salt could well afford to pay a tax in case the proposed duty was laid upon imported salt; all, however, who advocated this tax, declared themselves opposed to a tax on salt at all; but, if foreign salt was taxed, they wished that made at home also taxed. Those opposed to this amendment, said that this was the first instance in this or any other country of an infant manufacture, and especially of a necessary of life, being taxed; that the tax would have the effect of discouraging these manufactures. Some salt-licks, it was said, had been already laid aside as unprofitable; that it would certainly be good policy in this Government to Jonathan O. Moseley, Hugh Nelson, Anthony New, William Piper, Timothy Pitkin, jun., James Pleasants, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, jun., Benjamin Pond, Peter B. Porter, Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, William Reed, William M. Richardson, Henry M. Ridgely, Samuel Ringgold, John Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, William Rodman Ebenezer Sage, Thomas Sammons, Ebenezer Seaver, John Sevier, Adam Seybert, Daniel Sheffey, John Smilie, George Smith, Philip Stuart, Silas Stow, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Uri Tracy, George M. Troup, Charles Turner, jun., Pierre Van Cortlandt, jun., Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, Robert Whitehill, Thomas Wilson, and Richard Winn. The question was then taken on agreeing to the proposition, as reported by the Committee of the Whole, for laying a duty of twenty cents a bushel on imported salt, and negatived-yeas 57, nays 60, as follows: H. of R. Divorces in the District of Columbia. YEAS-Willis Alston, junior, William Anderson, Stevenson Archer, Ezekiel Bacon, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Adam Boyd, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Elias Earle, William Findley, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, Jacob Hufty, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Peter Little, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, Samuel McKee, Alex ander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, James Milnor, Samuel L. Mitchill, Jeremiah Morrow, Anthony New, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, James Pleasants, jun., Peter B. Porter, Josiah Quincy, William Reed, Samuel Ringgold, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, Ebenezer Sage, Thomas Sammons, Ebenezer Seaver, Adam Seybert, John Smilie, George Smith, Silas Stow, Uri Tracy, George M. Troup, Charles Turner, jun., Pierre Van Cortlandt, jun., and Richard Winn. MARCH, 1812. I am willing to raise the sum taxed on salt on any other article less objectionable; I would even prefer laying it on land. I will, therefore, suggest to the honorable gentleman from Maryland the propriety of withdrawing his motion until the resolutions are gone through; the whole subject will then be open for consideration, and the House can select some other article as a proper substitute for salt, which I hope will be found equally convenient and less odious. Mr. SEYBERT did not know that he should have made a single observation on this subject, had it not been for the vote which had just been taken; but he must acknowledge he felt himself so disappointed and mortified, that he believed he should vote against every other tax. For, if gentlemen will oppose one item of taxation, because it happens to fall a little harder on some NAYS-John Baker, David Bard, Harmanus Bleeck- sections of the country than others; whilst other er, James Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, Robert gentlemen, for the sake of accommodation, have Brown, William A. Burwell, Epaphroditus Champion, consented to lay much heavier burdens on their Martin Chittenden, Matthew Clay, James Cochran, constituents, he despaired of establishing any sys Lewis Condit, William Crawford, Roger Davis, Samuel tem of taxation. He had been told we were Dinsmoor, William Ely, James Emott, Asa Fitch, entering on a war for commerce. He did not so Meshack Franklin, Thomas Gholson, Charles Golds- consider it. He believed we were about to enborough, Peterson Goodwyn, Edwin Gray, John A. Harper, Aylett Hawes, Richard Jackson, jun., Philip Sovereignty, as a nation. Whilst the Pennsyl gage in a war to maintain our honor, liberty, and B. Key, Lyman Law, Joseph Lefever, Joseph Lewis, vanians are selling their wheat for two dollars a jun., Nathaniel Macon, George C. Maxwell, Thomas Moore, Archibald McBryde, William McCoy, James bushel, it could not be said they wanted a war to Morgan, Jonathan O. Moseley, Hugh Nelson, Joseph obtain any better price for their produce; if any Pearson, William Piper, Timothy Pitkin, jun., Benja- part of the country were influenced by motives min Pond, Elisha R. Potter, John Randolph, Henry of interest, it must be the tobacco and cotton M. Ridgely, John Rhea, William Rodman, John planters; it might, therefore, be rather termed a Sevier, Samuel Shaw, Daniel Sheffey, John Smith, war for agriculture, and a particular species of it, Richard Stanford, Philip Stuart, Samuel Taggart, than for commerce. But he had always conBenjamin Tallmadge, Laban Wheaton, Robert White-sidered it as having higher objects in view. hill, William Widgery, Thomas Wilson, and Robert Wright. [Yeas 57, nays 60. Absent on this vote twentythree members, viz: Messrs. BARTLETT, SULLIVAN, CUTTS, TALLMAN, AVERY, COOK, PAULDING, HYNEMAN, TALIAFERRO, SAWYER, WILLIAMS, COBB, and GANNETT, absent from the city; and Messrs. CLOPTON, BIGELOW, WHITE, DAVENPORT, STURGES, FISK, STRONG, LIVINGSTON, GOLD, and RICHARDSON, absent from indisposition and other causes.] The SPEAKER declared the motion of the gentleman from Maryland to be out of order; as all propositions for raising revenue must first be discussed in Committee of the Whole. A motion to adjourn was made and carried, and the House adjourned till Monday. MONDAY, March 2. Mr. WRIGHT reported a bill supplementary to the "Act more effectually to provide for the orThe fifth resolution next came under consider-ganization of the militia of the District of Coation for laying duties on distillers, when Mr. McKIм moved to strike out what relates to laying a duty on the capacity of the still, and to insert in its place twenty five cents per gallon. Mr. MOORE said the vote which had just been taken and decided against taxing salt, induced him to be in favor of the motion of the gentleman from Maryland, or at least in favor of substituting some other article in lieu of salt, on which a tax will operate with more equality and less oppression on the poor. I am fully apprized, said he, of the necessity of providing the sinews of war, and I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that I shall be as ready and willing to use them in the assertion of the rights of my country as any gentleman on this floor. Although I have voted against the taxing salt, as I consider it an article of the first necessity, which ought not to be taxed, lumbia;" which was twice read and committed. The SPEAKER laid before the House a report of the Secretary of the Treasury, in pursuance of a resolution of the House calling on him for a statement of the exports of the United States for some years past; also, a letter from the Seeretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of War and Comptroller, on the subject of the refugee claims, &c.; also, a letter from the Chief Justice of the United States in behalf of the Supreme Court, acknowledging the favor conferred on, them by the use of the Congressional Library. DIVORCES IN THE DISTRICT. Mr. Lewis, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, made the following report: The Committee for the District of Columbia, to whom were referred the petitions of Jane Deakins, praying for a divorce from William Deakins, and of David Beck, praying for a divorce from Ellen, his wife, submit the following report: H. OF R. treme regret, the dissatisfaction that was prevalent amongst his friends in consequence of the rejection of the resolution recommending a tax The only object which the petitioners can have in on salt. He had voted against that particular view is to be enabled, respectively, to enter into new resolution, and, after reviewing with the most contracts of marriage. Were marriages only a civil rigid impartiality his conduct upon that occasion, institution, the courts of law would be open to all par- he could perceive in it nothing to disapprove. I ties seeking the redress now prayed for, for alleged most distinctly and explicitly, said Mr. G., upon breach of the marriage contract: but it is something that occasion, stated in my place that, if the salt more; it is a divine ordinance, and has been pro- tax could, by any gentleman, be shown to be nenounced such by the highest legal as well as spiritual cessary to equalize the system of taxation, I was authority. The competency of any human tribunal to dissolve its sacred obligations may well be doubted. ready to yield my assent to it, although, as was The justice or policy, under any circumstances, of hardship on all the middle country, a section of acknowledged, it would operate with peculiar weakening the matrimonial institution, upon the purity which I have the honor to represent. Neither of which depends the very fabric of society itself, may the honorable Chairman of the Committee of be boldly denied. Divorces are not merely the effect of corruption of manners; they are the cause also. Ways and Means, nor any other gentleman, unThey hold out temptations to crime which human in- dertook to prove that this tax was requisite to profirmity cannot at all times resist. They hold out in-doce this equal effect. I, moreover, then stated, centives to that adultery which they are called in to I remedy. Extreme cases may indeed be put, but they are rare; both parties are generally in fault. Shall a very few individuals, who present themselves in a questionable shape, be debarred from contracting a second marriage, or shall the foundations of society be loosened for their special accommodation? Shall the heaviest public injury be encountered for the convenience of those, who, for the most part, have shown how little reliance is to be placed upon their virtue or discretion? Shall incentives to nuptial infidelity be presented to the great body of society for the personal gratification of a few unfortunate members, diffusing dissatisfaction and discontent, where, but for the deceitful hope of divorce, they had never been known? as I now declare, that I was, and am prepared to go as far as any man in providing the necessary revenue to sustain the credit of the country in the approaching contest. My object was to impose the taxes on subjects that could best bear them. I thought there were many objects of taxation preferable to salt, (an indispensable of life,) and was desirous of raising the amount contemplated from salt by a tax on whiskey, an addition to the direct tax, or in any other more eligible mode. But it now seems that, if the article of salt is excluded, the whole system of taxation will be endangered. We are told in conversation, since the vote on the salt tax, that The frequency of divorces may be taken as an unthe system which has been presented by the Comerring criterion of the depravity of morals. A respect-mittee of Ways and Means is a system of comable authority has declared, that "from the Reforma tion to the commencement of the eighteenth century, there had occurred only four instances of Parliamentary divorce; but, in the present reign, they had increased to the enormous number of one hundred and ninety-three." It is notorious that the crime which is made the ground-work of the divorce, is frequently committed with the most "deliberate and unblushing indifference," for the purpose of enabling the adulterer and adultress thereafter to intermarry. Your committee will not attempt to pursue the subject further. It is calculated to inspire the most solemn reflections. They are opposed to divorce upon principle, as tending to excite family discord; as bearing hard upon the weaker sex, whom it is especially incumbent upon us to protect and to cherish; above all, as weakening the matrimonial tie, upon the sanctity of which depend "all the charities of father, son, and brother." The committee will not enter into the question how far it may be wise or politic to hold forth to the world this District as an asylum for those who wish to obtain absolution from the marriage vow. They will content themselves with submitting the following resolution: Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioners ought not to be granted. promise and concession, and that it must be taken altogether, the bad with the good; that, if we pay the salt tax, the Eastern and the Western country will suffer peculiarly by an increase of the impost, and by the land tax. The middle country will experience no exemption from these particular burdens. Sooner than this measure should fail; sooner than we should not provide for the expenses we have incurred to resist the encroachments of our enemy; sooner, in fine, than degrade and disgrace the nation, I believe it would be better for us to take the whole draught, just as it has been proposed. Yes, sir, perhaps ! might say, even if it were hemlock. I, sir, would vote two dollars a bushel on salt, rather than see the present course of policy frustrated. Mr. Speaker, we who form the majority have all the same end in view: the maintenance of the rights, honor, and independence of the country against the lawless aggressions of our enemy. To attain this end. I would take the best means. than be defeated in the accomplishment of it, I would agree to any means not absolutely intolerable. It is therefore that I. on the present occasion, will concede much of my own opinion, in order to harmonize with, and conciliate those with whom I unfortunately disagree on this particular point. Concession and compromise, among those who have the same common object, are often indispensable duties. It is by this senex-timent, sir, that I am actuated. We should not Referred to a Committee of the Whole on Monday next. WAR TAXES. The House proceeded to consider the order of the day. Mr. GHOLSON said he had witnessed with Rather H. OF R. War Taxes. MARCH, 1812. the necessity of giving this protection? Is there any large capital necessary for carrying on salt works? Do they require any great complication of machinery? Let gentlemen turn their eye to Turk's Island, the great source from which sup dispute among ourselves. It is by union and harmony only that we can serve our constituents. I, for one, will pledge myself that I will furnish no cause of schism amongst our friends. I am hap. py, said he, in indulging the hope that several of my friends, with whom I have acted on this sub-plies of salt are drawn. Receptacles for the salt ject, and who have, I doubt not, been influenced by the same motives with myself, will concur with me in the motion I am about to make. Under these impressions, I move you, sir, to reconsider the vote, of Friday last, on the resolution imposing a tax on salt. Mr NELSON said he should feel no disposition to object to any gentleman reconsidering any vote which he had given, if it could be said that it had been given with precipitancy, or without mature deliberation. But, when he reflected that this question was not for the first time before the House; that at an early period of the session, two distinct propositions of this nature had been rejected after debate; that the same question had been again discussed in Committee of the whole House; and that the mind of every man was brought to bear upon it, and that it was then decided that a tax should not be laid-he could find no apology for reconsidering that discussion. He found no apology in the reason assigned, that its rejection was evidence of an indisposition to assert the rights of the Government. I do not, said Mr. N., feel myself amenable to this censure, because, let it be known, that when I take a tax away from one subject, I shall not hesitate a moment to impose it to an equal amount on another. Away, then, with the idea that, by the rejection of this item, we shall break up the plan of the Government; more especially, let not such an argument have weight, when I shall show that this tax is incapable of producing any material revenue whatever. Mr. N. said he had, indeed, been astonished to hear a gentleman say that the rejection of this item would break up the whole system; that there was such symmetry in the report that, take away but one member, and the whole fabric was dissolved. The symmetry of the system had not so forcibly struck him. He saw deformity in it. He saw a heterogeneous mass of discordant materials mixed up together; but not so intimately interwoven that they cannot be separated. Let this item be omitted, as it may be, without a derangement of the system, and the amount expected to accrue from it be levied on some article more productive, which will raise a revenue more adequate to the end which it is the object of the report to attain. water are dug on the open beach, where the salt is formed by the process of evaporation. The salt is then heaped up, and thence carried to the store-houses. The same process takes place in the manufacture of that article on our seacoast. It is true that at the saline works on our frontier boilers are used. But is there such a peculiar complication of machinery required, involving great expense, that the Government is to hold out encouragement exclusively to this manufac ture? Permit me to say, even if were so, it will sufficiently feel the protecting influence of the Government. The moment we are involved in war all foreign salt will be excluded, except that which comes into the country indirectly and improperly. A sufficient bounty on manufacture will be afforded by the monopoly of supply such a state of things will foster. This, therefore, cannot be considered as a protecting duty; it cannot be considered in that light, when we find it incorporated in a system of taxation, which, we are told, is necessary to raise a revenue to enable us to wield the energies of the nation against a foreign enemy. But, when I turn my eyes to the subject of this tax on salt, which is the source whence it is calculated that a revenue of $400,000 is to be derived, I am content to discard the idea that the salt tax is a tax on the poor man; that he who eats but little meat must mingle with the salt he uses the reflection, that he pays a tax for this necessary of life, of which, from the absence of other condiments which the more affluent use, he consumes more than they. Putting all this out of view, I will view this question merely on the ground of a tax productive of revenue to the amount which is calculated to be drawn from it. What, asked Mr. N., is the greatest revenue which has ever been drawn from salt? Five hundred thousand dollars, in the most prosperous times of commerce, is the utmost which this tax would produce. Whence is salt imported? From Spain, St. Ubes, Portugal, Liverpool, and a small portion from the West Indies. Viewing this question as a statesman ought to look at it, I would not calculate on the European portion of this trade; I would calculate on the whole European supply being precluded, and our import of salt confined to the West Indies—the total of which is not a tenth part of the amount we usually import. In 1807, the revenue of the United States amounted to upwards of sixteen millions of dollars. According to the estimate of the Secretary of the Treasury, of the revenue derivable from commerce during a war, our revenue from that source will be reduced to about This is the third time this session that the question now under consideration has been presented to the House. I ask the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means (said Mr. N.) what is the object of this proposition? Whether it be intended as a protecting duty on the manufacture of salt, or as a source of revenue, an unfailing certain source of revenue in time of pres-one-eighth part of what it was during the year sure? If we are told that the object is to impose this as a protecting duty on the manufacture of this article, I will ask of the gentleman where is 1807. The amount of salt imported into the United States during the year 1807, was about three and a third millions of bushels. If we only |
