← Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856, Vol. 1 (of 16), Volume 2
Chapter 79
Revenue Bill: Salt and Coal Tax
Friday, May 16.
The House resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House on the bill laying additional duties on goods, wares, and merchandise imported into the United States, and on the tonnage of ships or vessels.
The three cents per bushel of additional duty on salt was objected to by Mr. Findlay, as oppressive to his constituents.
Mr. Ames was convinced, that this was much better than a land-tax. It was beyond all comparison, more cheap, more certain, and more equal in the collection than a land-tax. He would rather tax salt, at even half a dollar per bushel, than agree to a land-tax.
Mr. Clark would be very glad to hear the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Findlay) specify, upon what subject he was willing to pay a tax? It was beyond the comprehension of Mr. C., for what sort of a tax the gentleman was prepared to vote, or, indeed, what sort of taxes the Western settlers of Pennsylvania pay. We lay a duty on sugar. They make sugar for themselves. We lay a tax on tobacco. They are to manufacture for themselves. We lay an excise on distilleries. They refuse to pay this tax, and, in fact, they do not pay it. We tax wines; but we are told that these people are poor. They cannot, therefore, afford to drink wine, on which the duty is very heavy, for that duty is paid only by the rich. We tax the importation of foreign fineries, such as silk, but silk also is not the dress of poor people, so that here again the constituents of the gentleman get off. We are going to tax the importation of foreign coals, but they have plenty of their own, and so far from paying a tax on them, are cutting a canal to bring them down to Philadelphia; which will drive out the importation of foreign coals, and so destroy the tax altogether. Under these circumstances, Mr. C. was solicitous to learn what taxes the back settlers paid, for, as far as he could understand, they paid none; and their Representative would do well to inform the House on what they were willing to pay a tax. Was Government to be burdened with them, and derive no compensation? Was it a sufficient reason for exempting a district from public burdens to say that the people are poor? Are taxes to be paid exclusively by the rich?
Mr. Rutherford objected to this duty on salt. It was often to be carried from one to three hundred and fifty miles inland, and in fact, it frequently costs twenty shillings per bushel. No tax could be so universally unpopular as this would be.
Mr. Findlay replied to Mr. Clark. As to sugar, though some of his neighbors made theirs, Mr. F. bought his own in Philadelphia. As to silks and other female fineries, his constituents did just like other people. They spent, in that way, as much as they could possibly afford, and had among them ladies very well dressed. As to other matters, his constituents purchased their manufactures in Philadelphia, and paid for them as other people did. Salt, he said, was known to be necessary for cattle in the back country. He was strongly against the tax.
Mr. Gillon likewise opposed the tax on salt. It had been proposed, in the State which he represented, but never could be carried through.
On a division, it was rejected—ayes 32, noes 47.
A motion was made for striking out twenty-five cents per ton of additional tonnage, on foreign vessels, in order to insert fifty.
It was passed in the negative—ayes 39, noes 41.
After going through the bill, the committee rose, and the House went into consideration of the amendments made in Committee of the Whole.
On the subject of an additional duty on coal imported, Mr. Giles said, that the rise was very moderate, from four and a half to six cents per ton. A Boston company was about, as he understood, to embark in this business, but waited to see the steps taken by Congress. There was as much coal in Virginia as would serve all America and Europe besides.
Mr. Wadsworth would have the additional duty restricted to all coal imported in foreign vessels.
Mr. Heister wanted to know, whether the price of coal had not been already doubled within these few years. He was informed that coal imported had of late risen from six dollars per ton, to twelve dollars and a half.
Mr. Fitzsimons said, that a few years would put an end to importation altogether. He defended the tax. He saw no danger to any of the manufactures in America, that make use of foreign coal arising from this tax. Nothing but a capital was wanting to make America supply herself.
Mr. Sherburne recommended the amendment of Mr. Wadsworth, as to the restriction of this duty to foreign bottoms.
Mr. Madison worded this amendment, "on all vessels not belonging to citizens of the United States;" because foreign bottoms might belong to people of this country. He was not solicitous about the fate of the motion. The amendment was lost; but the original motion was carried.