PUBLISHED WEDNESDAYS AND SATURDAYS BY 7OHN FFNXn i,
JUHN f * N *o, No. ~, BROAD-STREET, NEAR THE EXCHANGE, NEW-YORK
[No. 11, cf Vol. ll.j
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
THURSDAY, APRIL 22, 1790.
On the Report of the Secretary of the Treasury.
Mr. Sherman's motion for ajfutning a part of the
State debts, under cons.deration.
MR. Madison. It is not without much reluct
ance that I tioublethe committee with any
observations on a fubjedl which has been so long
under discussion, and may be thought to be en
tirely exhausted. I must refer for iny apology to
i the uncommon perseverance with which the ad
vocates for an assumption adhere to their obje<sl,
notwithstanding the difficulties which oppol'e it.
On the supposition that the measure in quellion
were ever so eligible, if it could be so modified
as to be acceptable to the general fcnfe of the go
vernment, and of its conllituents at large, every
member ought I thiuk to be (truck with the im
propriety of pressing a matter of such peculiar
importance and delicacy, by a bare majority.
The proposition now under debate is liable to
all the objections to the former one, as well as to
the many others that have been stated agaiult it.
friom the explanation g*iven by the gentleman
from Connecticut, it is evident that this proposi
tion may in the result assume the fliape of the
original one. It may therefore be fairly comba
ted by all tliofe arguments that were brought ci
ther against the original proposition, or against
the very objectionable manner in which the blanks
are proposed to be filled up.
I am not insensible that an afliimptjon H"fc4>e
state debts is under certain afpecfts, a measure hot
unworthy of a favorable attention. If it had nqt
leall plausible recommendations, 1 do rtot
think it could have obtained so refpetftabie a pa
tronage here : lam sure it would not have ori
ginated in the quarter which proposed it. But,
Sir, it is a quellion that must be coniidered and
reconsidered in all its various points of view, and
fljtrmore'u'ius already been inveitigacccl, the
more objections have multiplied, and the more
solid they have appeared. The arguments used
in favor of the measure have been supposed
weighty,but,Sir, I consider them as unsupported.
It has been contended that the state debts are in
their nature d#bts of the United States ; that they
were only from different offices, and have borne
a different denomination, but that in justice they
are the debts of the United States, #nd that the
individual creditors can of right claim payment
ofthe fame from the general government.
I deny the principle, Sir, and I think it is dis
proved by the arguments of the gentlemen them
selves. If the debts of the particular states be
nothing more than the debts of the United States
underanotherdenoinination,andifwe are bound
to provide for them precisely as for the debts of
the United Slates,let gentlemen consider whether
they are not bound to view them in this light
wherever they may be found. If they are debts
of the United States in the hands of individual
citizens, for the fame reason that the other debts
in private hands are debts of the United States,
must they not be debts of the United States also
when in the Treasuries ofthe different states ?
Will gentlemen fay that what are called the
state debts ought to be viewed in that light when
in the hands of citizens, and that this quality
foi fakes them the moment they are received into
® -^ ate Treasury. If they wish to preserve con
iiftency in their reasoning, they must fay, either
that the debts are diflimilar in the hands of pri
vate citizens, or that they are limilar in the hands
of the states.
rhe debts ofrhe particular states cannot in any
point of view be considered as actual debts of the
United States; and the United States arc not
b'lund by any part requisition, or any refoluttons
now existing to afiume them, till the accomus are
fettled and the balances afcerrained. We have
een told, fir, not only that the aflumption of
f ie Hate debts by the United States is a matter of
ught on the part of the states, and a matter of
obligation on the part of the United States, but
ikewife that iris equitable; nay, that it is a
matter of necefiity. -
It has been said that rhe United States are in-
v t with the resources of the particular states,
aii< t i u therefore they are bound to provide for
,r' fHS tlL *°f e states. I think I may fafely
4\ r. 1 'vm u s t ' l ' s queftiou on a qiieftiou of
L ' ' lct ''er the states most urgent in this bu-
Kr e r^ tJIe d from providing for their
y t»;c eftabjiflmien? of the preient confti
WEDNESDAY, MAT i 9, 1790,
tution ? If gentlemen aflbrt that to be the cafe,
I think it is incumbent upon them then to prove
either that the resources which they have eiven,
up would exceed their quota of the federal Tequi
htions or that the use of these resources by the
general government will throw a difproportioned
burthen upon that particular part of thecommu
mty. Let us consider, fir, what is the ratio in
which the states, in their individual capacity,
ought to bear the debts of vie United States, and
what is the ratio in which' :hey will contribute
under the taxes that it is proposed to levy. The
only evidence by which we can guide ourselves
111 this enquiry is a ftatenient from the several
custom houses. I believe indeed, that such a
ftatenient may not be concluftve. I think it is
imperfect ; at the fame time it is the best guide
in our rcach, and probably it will be fuflicient to
illuitrate the present argument—The state of
New-Hampshire, accordingto this statement, will
contribute about one hundredth part of what
will be contributed by the whole. Her ratio of
contribution according to her representation
would be nearly about one twentieth. Here then,
in'fasTt, isafavingof four fifrhs to that state. The
state may then take this saving and apply it to
the purpose of discharging her domestic debt ;
flie is relieved in that proportion, aind therefore
in that proportion she is more able to provide for
her state debt under the new cjnftitution than
under the old one.
i lie state of Connedlicut will contribute about
one thirty-eighth ; her proper quota would be a-
one thirteenth. Here then is a favino- of
two-thirds to the state of Connecticut ; ami in
that proportion is her fuuation better under the
new Conllitution than the oil. Taking theftates
eastward of New-York altogether, that the gen
tlenxen rendered incapable of bearing the
burthen oftheltate debts, l.y the adoption of the
new conftirution ; I fay, take the whole together,
and they will contribute 'bout a sixth only ;
whereas they \vo;?!d b;<\ iad to contribute,
a foui th, ii thisconflitutioi. idnotbeeueftablilh
ed,and they had paid their part of the debt of the
United States In my apprehension, then, fir,
as the payment of the state debts cannot beclaiin
ed as a matter ofright, neither can such payment
be called for 011 die principles of equity, or
what is molt of all urged, ncceflity. But we are
told that policy is alio in favor of the measure.
A gentleman from Mafl'achufetts has said, that
the people of Maflachufetts never would submit
to a rejection of the measure; that it will create
a Ipirit of opposition to the government ; in
short, that it will endanger the union itfelf. I
confefi that thefearc consequences that would be
dreadful to ine, if I could suppose they would
really take place, and that evils of greater mag
nitude wouht not ensue from an adoption of the
measure. It is my opinion, fir, that if the refu
fal to alluine the state debts would produce dan
gerous consequences to the union, from the dis
contents that it is apprehended will grow out of
the measure, much more have we to Fear from an
afl'umption, particularly if hazarded by a small
majority. Sir, it we (ould ascertain the opini
ons of our constituents, individually, I believe we
rtiould find fourfifths of the citizens of the United
States againftthe afl'umption ; I believe we should
find more ; I believe I speak within bounds when
1 fay, that those who would be for an afl'umption
would not amount to one-fifth; this is indeed
probable conjecture only. But on the other hand
let meafk, what evidence have we that there will
be any great disappointment or difcontenlsfrom
a non-afl'umption > The Legislature of the state
of New-Hampshire have lately been in felfion ;
have they asked for this afl'umption ? No; on the
contrary, tho* they have not inftruifted their de
legates to vote against it, it appears that it was
thought of, and that the bulk of the members
disapproved of it. The Legislature of Maflachu
fetts hive been in session; they were apprized
that this matter was under consideration, and yet
there has been no declaration from them, as far
as 1 know, that can induce us to believe they
wish for it; on the contrary, it would appear
from the measures they have taken to provide
for the paymentof theirftate debt, that they had
proceeded on a supposition that an aflumption
would not take place. With refpetfi to several
other states, their Legislatures have also been in
none of them, except South-Cafolina,
have made any declaration on the fubjed:. If
we are to disregard that species of evidence, a"nd
to look back to the expeiftations of the people, I
do not think that there is afingle indication that
457
, this measure was ever thought of by our condim
ents. Sir, I may fafely fay, it was never expected
by the generality of them.
It has been said, too, that policy recommends
the measure. It has been repeated that if the as
sumption does not take place, no part of the re
venues drawn from the union at large will return
to the distant parts of it. Sir, I thought this ar
gument had been set aside fouitiine lince The
very reverie will happen. The Hate debts have
begun already to travel towards the central parts
ot the union, and to such an amount as to make
it probable, that it they are provided for by us
nearly the whole will follow. Should this be
the cafe, I believe such disadvantages will ensue
as will prove the measure very impolitic. Ia
proportion as the whole money contributed in
the way of taxes shall center near the government
or in a particular part of the union, yon increase
the evil ofdifcordant interests and local jealousies
which is already too much felt. Bur, perhaps
tnis is not the worst consequence to be apprehen
-1 concieve that a very great part of the
proper debt of the United States will q;o into the
hands of foreigners, and that wethalfbe heavily
burdened in paying an interest to them which
cannot be expected to remain in the country ; and
in proportion as you increase thedebtof the uni
ted States you will increase this evil.
l am of opinion alf6 that the measure is not
politic, because, if the public debt is a public e
vil, an adainption of the state debts will enor
mously increase, and perhaps, perpetuate i»- It
is my idea, Sir, that the United States and the
ieveral ltates could discharge a debt of eighty
millions, with greater ease and in less time ?lian
the United States alone could do it. I found
my opinion on this consideration, that after the
United States/hall have resorted to every means
oi taxation within their power, there will still re
main resources from which monies mayberaifed
by the ltates Nay I will go farther, and illustrate
the remark by adding, that after a state shall
l ts P ower of taxation to every ob
ject falling under general laws, there would still
remain resources from which further taxes mia-hc
be drawn within subdivisions of it, by the subor
dinate authorities of the state. But lir, when we
consider, that in foine parts of the union there is
an unconquerable aversion to direcltaxes, at least
it laid by the general government; that in other
parts an equal aversion to excises prevails ; how
will the United States, so circumscribed as to the
held of taxation, be able to draw forth such re-
It has been aderted that it would be politic to
afluine the state debts, because it would add
itrength to t;he national government. There is
no man more anxious for the success of the go
vernment than lam, and no one who will join more
heartily in curing its defects ; but I wifli tliefe de
ters to be remedied by additional constitutional
poweis, i t they should be found neceflary This
mJdy y P '° l)er ' Cffed:aa] > and Permanent re-
Several gentlemen, Sir, have gone into another
held of argument in favor of this measure. It
has been said, that theconftitution itfelf requires
the aflumption. One of u.y colleagues has alked
a very proper quell, on,—lf as we have been told
the aflumption originated in the convention why
were not words inferred that would have incor
porated and made the state debts part of the debts
of the United States? Sir, if there was a majority
who disapproved of the measure, certainly ~0 ar
gument can be drawn from this source • if there
was a majority who approved of it, but thought
it inexpedient to make it a part of the constituti
on, they mull have been reitrained by a fear thac
it might produce diffentions and render the fuc
cess ot their plan doubtful. Ido recoiled: that
fiich a measure was proposed, and, if my memory
does not deceive me, the very gentleman who
now appeals to the constitution in support of his
argument, disrelished the measure at that time
and alfigned for a reason, that it would adminis
ter relief perhaps exadlly in proportion as the
ltates had been deficient in making exertions It
has been also remarked that the constitution,
having been established for obtaining perfect jus
tice, it cannot be carried into effect unless full
justice is done on this fubjedl, orin other words,
unless the state debts are assumed. Sir, if we are
to take these words in their full extent, we must
not stop merely with securing justice to the cre
ditors of the government, we Ihould also endea
vour to secure justice to every private creditor
Hi(so
[Whole No. irj.]