"and prizes required by Congress will be an unequal "burden on some of the states. That it is impossible, "if the proposition should be acceded to at all, that it "will be on any other plan, than that the produce shall "be passed to the credit of the state. And that its "mercantile interest object against it as partial, alleg"ing that it is notorious that the commodities which "they import are vended below their cost."

Your committee have deliberately considered these several objections; and are persuaded of their insufficiency to justify any alteration in the act to which the objections are made, either as to the duty itself, or the manner of its application. Nothing is more to be wished, than that Congress was enabled to assign, to the respective states their quotas of aids on fixed and equitable principles. The necessity of it, as early as the year 1775, was fully understood. The states were then called upon to sink by taxes their respective proportions of the bills of credit ordered to be emitted. It was directed that the quota of each should be deter mined according to the number of its inhabitants of all ages; and the governments then in being were pressed to ascertain by the most impartial means in their pow er, and to return as soon as possible, the number of inhabitants. This recommendation was in vain attempted to be inforced. With very few exceptions, it has been neglected to this day. The confederation prescribed another rule for fixing the quotas of aids for the common defence, or general welfare, namely, that they shall be supplied by the several states in proportion to the value of all appropriated lands, and the houses, and buildings in the respective states.

But the attainment of such an estimate, flagrante bello, is difficult; perhaps in some states, which are the seat of war, impracticable; in every view it must be remote. Thus Congress, without an accurate knowledge of the comparative wealth and abilities of the respective states, were, from the necessity of the case, obliged not only to call for aids, but to apportion those aids on such information as they possessed. Apprized that the quotas might be unequal, they provided the best remedy in their power, and which will ultimately do justice to all the states, each being entitled, on a final settlement, to full credit for the principal and interest of all advances beyond their due proportion.

The ravages of the enemy in some of the states, and their possession of strong posts throughout South Carolina and Georgia, have unavoidably occasioned an increase of the quotas of such states as enjoy greater internal tranquillity and freedom of commerce. Whether Massachusetts in particular hath been called upon in an undue proportion to her abilities, as seems to be apprehended, cannot now be determined; but their honourable court do justice in ascribing it, if it has happened, to errour. That no partiality could have been intended, is as certain, as that the most punctual compliance with the respective requisitions is essential to the publick safety.

Imported commodities, it is affirmed, are vended in Massachusetts below their original cost; and that therefore the proposed duty will operate partially against the mercantile interest. Information respecting imports into Philadelphia leads us to conclude

that the disadvantage pointed out in this objection arises from accidental circumstances, and not from any permanent cause. But it seems sufficient to observe, that either a profit will arise on foreign commodities, or the importation must cease. For no commerce can be long pursued, which, instead of enriching, impairs the substance of the merchant. Besides, the aid required ought not to be measured by the present hour. It will be contributed many years after peace shall be established, and when we may expect that our commerce will be secure and prosperous.

The honourable court seem to apprehend, that the duty will operate on the states themselves unequally. It may be necessary, in order to remove this objection, to recur to the motives which gave it a preference in the opinion of Congress.

The publick debts actually incurred on loan office certificates, and other loans, had created an annual interest of more than a million of dollars. Those engagements, although contracted on the faith and for the defence of the United States, Congress had no means to fulfil. It became then an indispensable act of justice, that funds should be provided by the states; that those funds should be productive, and of sufficient permanency to secure the publick creditors; and that the burden which they might impose should be uniformly and equally sustained. To combine so many states in one general system; to reconcile it to their opinions, their policy and their internal circumstances, will always be difficult. Without liberal sentiments with respect to each other; without confidence in the

general council, and a regard for the safety and happiness of the whole confederacy, it will be impracticable. What tax could have been pointed out, to which some of the states might not have raised objections? Had an excise, a land tax, or a capitation, been recommended, would either of them have been preferred to the duty under consideration? Could either of them have been carried so easily into effect, or have operated with so much impartiality? It is indeed the interest of a nation to leave trade as free and unincumbered as circumstances will permit; and yet we find that even those governments, which owe all their riches and grandeur to commerce, do not hesitate to draw from it contributions for the support of war. Considering then the great exertions which are necessary at this interesting conjuncture, ought these United States to plead an exemption? Surely a moderate duty on trade cannot give dissatisfaction to a people, who have nothing less at stake than their honour, good faith, liberty and independence. As a partial regulation of individual states there is no reason to think it will ever take place. The danger of transferring the trade from such as impose, to those which are exempt from the burden, will effectually prevent it. There is only one method in which it can be introduced-by the authority of the United States co-operating with the respective legislatures.

When this duty was debated, it was taken for granted, on the general maxim, that it would ultimately be borne by the consumer. In this view no tax could have been devised, under our present circumstances, which afforded a prospect of more equality and im

partiality, or of less objection, or discontent. The states, whose commerce is the the most flourishing, will appear in the first instance to contribute largely to the common treasury. But remotely the consumer, wherever he resides, must bear the burden. And the merchant who advances it, will take care to receive Even if it should be admitted, that

full interest. states which enjoy the greatest commercial, advantage may be exposed to a share of the duty beyond their strict proportion, might it not be considered as a just tribute for peculiar blessings denied by the fortune of common war to their less happy sister states? Blessings purchased perhaps by their sufferings and secured by their resistance against invaders, who might otherwise have had leisure to close all the avenues to

commerce.

The last objection implies, that if the proposition should in part be acceded to, it would be insisted on that the proceeds of the duties should be passed to the credit of the states from which it might arise. This objection was also fully considered when the subject was debated. A review of the situation and commerce of the several states, as well before the war as at this day, will be sufficient to remove it. Several states, and in every part of the continent, import for their neighbours. Is it reasonable that the duties on goods, which the latter consume, should be applied to the exclusive benefit of the state which has had the advantage of the importation? Would a measure so illiberal meet with approbation or acquiescence? Every system, which is to operate throughout the United States, must have equity for its basis;