Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

TUESDAY, JANUARY 14TH.

Congress adjourned for the meeting of the Grand Committee, to whom was referred the Report concerning the valuation of the lands, and who accordingly met.

The Committee were, in general, strongly impressed with the extreme difficulty and inequality, if not impracticability of fulfilling the Article of the Confederation relative to this point; Mr. RUTLEDGE, however, excepted, who, although he did not think the rule so good a one as a census of inhabitants, thought it less impracticable than the other members. And if the valuation of land had not been prescribed by the Federal Articles, the Committee would certainly have preferred some other rule of appointment, particularly that of numbers, under certain qualifications as to slaves. As the Federal Constitution, however, left no option, and a few* only were disposed to recommend to the States an alteration of it, it was necessary to proceed, first, to settle its meaning; secondly, to settle the least objectionable mode of valuation. On the first point, it was doubted, by several members, whether the returns which the report under consideration required from the States would not be final, and whether the Articles of Confederation would allow Congress to alter them after they had fixed on this mode; on this point, no vote was taken. A second question, afterwards raised in the course of the

* Mr. HAMILTON was most strenuous on this point. Mr. WILSON also favored the idea. Mr. MADISON also, but restrained, in some measure, by the declared sense of Virginia. Mr. GORHAM, and several others also, but wishing previous experience.

discussion, was, how far the Articles required a specific valuation, and how far it gave a latitude as to the mode; on this point, also, there was a diversity of opinions, but no vote taken.

Secondly, as to the mode itself referred to the Grand Committee, it was strongly objected to by the Delegate from Connecticut, Mr. DYER, by Mr. HAMILTON, by Mr. WILSON, by Mr. CARROLL, and by Mr. MADISON, as leaving the States too much to the bias of interest, as well as too uncertain and tedious in the execution. In favor of the Report was Mr. RUTLEDGE, the father of it, who thought the honor of the States, and their mutual confidence, a sufficient security against frauds and the suspicion of them. Mr. GORHAM favored the Report also, as the least impracticable mode, and as it was necessary to attempt, at least, some compliance with the federal rule before any attempt could be properly made to vary it. An opinion entertained by Massachusetts, that she was comparatively in advance to the United States, made her anxious for a speedy settlement of the mode by which a final apportionment of the common burden could be effected. The sentiments of the other members of the Committee were not expressed.

Mr. HAMILTON proposed, in lieu of a reference of the valuation to the States, to class the lands throughout the United States under distinctive descriptions, viz.: arable, pasture, wood, &c., and to annex a uniform rate to the several classes according to their different comparative value, calling on the States only for a return of the quantities and descriptions. This mode would have been acceptable to the more com

[ocr errors]

pact and populous States, but was totally inadmissible to the Southern States.

Mr. WILSON proposed, that returns of the quantity of land and of the number of inhabitants in the respective States should be obtained, and a rule deduced from the combination of these data. This also would have affected the States in a similar manner with the proposition of Mr. HAMILTON. On the part of the Southern States, it was observed, that, besides its being at variance with the text of the Confederation, it would work great injustice, as would every mode which admitted the quantity of lands within the States into the measure of their comparative wealth

and abilities.

Lastly, it was proposed by Mr. MADISON, that a valuation should be attempted by Congress, without the intervention of the States. He observed, that as the expense attending the operation would come ultimately from the same pockets, it was not very material whether it was borne in the first instance by Congress or the States, and it at least deserved consideration whether this mode was not preferable to the proposed reference to the States.

The conversation ended in the appointment of a sub-committee, consisting of Mr. MADISON, Mr. CARROLL, and Mr. WILSON, who were desired to consider the several modes proposed, to confer with the Superintendent of Finance, and make such report to the Grand Committee as they should judge fit.

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15TH.

A letter, dated the nineteenth of December, from General Greene, was received, notifying the evacuation of Charleston. It was, in the first place, referred to the Secretary of Congress for publication; excepting the passage which recited the exchange of prisoners, which, being contrary to the resolution of the sixteenth of October against partial exchanges, was deemed improper for publication. It was in the next place referred to a committee, in order that some complimentary report might be made in favor of General Greene and the Southern army. Dr. RAMSAY, having come in after this reference, and being uninformed of it, moved that a committee might be appointed to devise a proper mode of expressing to General Greene the high sense entertained by Congress of his merits and services. In support of his motion, he went into lavish praises of General Greene, and threw out the idea of making him a Lieutenant General. His motion being opposed as somewhat singular and unnecessary after the reference of General Greene's letter, he withdrew it.

A letter was received from General Washington enclosing a certificate from Mr. Chittenden, of Vermont, acknowledging the receipt of the communication which General Washington had sent him of the proceedings of Congress on the fifth of December.

[blocks in formation]

THURSDAY, JANUARY 16TH.

Mr. RUTLEDGE informed Congress, that there was reason to apprehend that the train of negotiation in Europe had been so misrepresented in the State of South Carolina, as to make it probable that an attempt might be made in the Legislature to repeal the confiscation laws of that State; and even if such attempt should fail, the misrepresentations could not fail to injure the sale of property confiscated in that State. In order, therefore, to frustrate these misrepresentations, he moved that the Delegates of South Carolina might be furnished with an extract from the letter of the fourteenth of October from Dr. Franklin, so far as it informed Congress "that something had been mentioned to the American Plenipotentiaries relative to the refugees and to English debts, but not insisted on; it being answered, on their part, that this was a matter belonging to the individual States, and on which Congress could enter into no stipulations." The motion was seconded by Mr. GERVAIS, and supported by Mr. RAMSAY. It was opposed by Mr. ELLSWORTH and Mr. WOLCOTT as improper, since a communication of this intelligence might encourage the States to extend confiscations to British debts, a circumstance which would be dishonorable to the United States, and might embarrass a treaty of peace. Mr. FITZSIMMONS expressed the same apprehensions; so did Mr. GORHAM. His colleague, Mr. OSGOOD, was in favor of the motion. By Mr. MADISON the motion was so enlarged and varied as "to leave all the Delegates at liberty to

[ocr errors]
« PředchozíPokračovat »