Gazette of the United-States. (New-York [N.Y.]), 1789-06-20 00:00:00

Gazette of the United States.
[No. XX.]
SATURDAY, JUNE 20, 1789.
[Published on Wednesday and Saturday.]
THE TABLET.—No. XX.
"However romantic it may seem, it is very true, that there are a sort of people who take great pains to be idle."
It is worthy of remark that men, who have nothing to do, seldom have any leisure; while those, who are in good earnest engaged in business, have spare time enough. The latter have leisure because they attend to their own business, and nothing else; the former want leisure because they do not attend to their own business, but to every thing else. I have among my acquaintance a character of each of these descriptions; one of them is named ATTENTUS, the other UBIQUITUS. It happened the other morning they both called on me, nearly at the same time.
ATTENTUS informed me, that having a little leisure, he had waited on me to adjust an account that lay between us. He tarried but a few minutes, proceeded deliberately, and accomplished what he came for.—UBIQUITUS ran up to the door to acquaint me with the great hurry he was in, and to apologize for his not being able to make me a visit; he continued with me upwards of an hour, without having any business, and spent most of the time in lamenting his amazing haste.—It may not be amiss to observe that ATTENTUS is largely concerned in mercantile affairs, and is an extensive dealer in West-India goods. No person ever managed his concerns with more method and prudence; and by doing every thing as it ought to be done, and finishing one thing before he begins another, he is at no time in hurry and confusion, and often finds moments of leisure and relaxation.
UBIQUITUS, on the other hand, though his whole life is spent in trifles, takes hold even of trifles at the wrong end; engages in many trivial things at once, and finishes no part of what he undertakes. He seems to have no determinate object of pursuit, and his friends are at a loss to conjecture how he employs himself; while he is incessantly complaining of the pressure and anxiety, which are occasioned by the multiplicity of his affairs. The reader will form a clearer idea of the difference of these characters, if I relate exactly the conversation that passed the other morning.
ATTENTUS called just at nine o'clock, and found me at breakfast. After informing me what he wished, he requested me to take my breakfast leisurely, as he could, without inconvenience, wait a few minutes. I rose from the table and handed him the account I had stated, and mentioned that he could examine it, at his leisure.—"It is my practice," said he, "to complete every thing of this kind on the spot." He soon went through the examination, made his remarks, and was again at leisure. I enquired of him if he knew how the wind stood, and whether the British Packet would sail that day? "I know very well," said he, "how the wind is, because I am looking for a vessel from the West-Indies; but I know nothing of the Packet, as I do not deal at Europe. It runs in my mind, however, that I heard somebody speaking of the matter; but who the person was, or what he said, I do not remember, as I never charge my memory with what does not relate to my own affairs." In examining some papers I was rather slower than common, and desired ATTENTUS to excuse me, as I was at the Theatre the evening before, and had not taken my usual hours of sleep. "Theatre," cried he, "are the players in town; how long have they been here?" Six weeks replied I. "Have they indeed," said ATTENTUS, "I never heard a word of it before." But, continued I, do you not read the newspapers? "I take the newspapers," answered he, "but I only peruse such parts of them as give information about my particular line of business." It happened in the course of conversation, that I asked him if he had attended the debates of Congress. He told me he had once been in the gallery, that his neighbours should not say he was an Antifederalist; but that he thought the business would go on as well without his company, as with it, and he should attend no more. If you have leisure, said I, you should be present at some of the debates, as they concern the mercantile interest, who in the first instance must pay the duties. "As to leisure," said he, "I have some, but my attending at the gallery will neither make the duties more or less. I shall find out what they are fast enough. The old duties were laid without my knowledge, but I soon had people after me to put me in mind of the business. Besides the members of Congress will not stay in my store and watch for customers while I am in their gallery." ATTENTUS was about leaving me, when I mentioned that I would walk a little way with him. "Well," said he, "if you are going my way I have no objection." Just as
we were at the door, UBIQUITUS came up and interrupted my walk.
He took me by the hand, and with a perplexed countenance, said he never was in such an hurry in his life, that he could scarce stay to apologize for not staying longer. However, while he was making these complaints, he followed me fairly into the house. Urged him to take a chair and tarry a few minutes. "No," replied he, I could not wait ten minutes, if you would give me ten guineas. I have every thing to do this morning. It was my intention to have wrote half a dozen letters before this hour of the day, but I shall not write one before dinner; and after all, shall not find leisure to hear the debates of Congress." I continued to urge him to take a seat and recover a little from his fatigue; but he seemed offended at the request, and fell into a run of conversation that I thought he never would have finished. He held one of the buttons of my coat with his left hand, that my impatience should not force me from him; and extended his right arm, that he might the more emphatically express the necessity of leaving me immediately. As nearly as I can recollect, the following are a few of the remarks and queries he made: "Have you heard of the arrivals at Philadelphia from the East-Indies? There was an excellent play last night, but I could not find time to attend. Do you not think the address from the Methodist Clergy to The President, was modestly done? The Bank I am told are sparing of their discounts now a days. Who do they talk of as Chief Justice of the United States? I fear I shall lose a beaver hat respecting the issue of the election for governor. What a perplexity it is to be so hurried; you see my hair is not combed, and I suppose my barber will call several times before I can be ready for him. My letters are unanswered for a long while past." But, enquired I, do you not notice your letters as soon as you receive them? ATTENTUS tells me he never leaves any thing undone, after the proper time of doing it. "Well he may," replied UBIQUITUS, "for he has nothing to do but to take care of his business. The case is quite otherwise with me. I have a whole chest of papers lying in heaps and confusion, and I do not even recollect the contents of half of them." I began to be weary of standing, and as my friend could not tarry long enough to sit down, I proposed a walk by way of relief to myself. UBIQUITUS joined in the proposal, and as he had much business abroad, and I had none, I left it with him to direct the course of our rambles. "We will go," said he, "stop! I have so many places to visit I hardly know which to call at first. Upon the whole I will accompany you wherever you please." My walk did not give the relief I expected, for UBIQUITUS stopped to speak with so many persons in the streets, that I was almost as still, as before I left the house; and I am not certain I should have escaped from my confinement for several hours, if a gentleman had not invited UBIQUITUS to go with him to a billiard table. This suggestion so pleased him, that he took his leave of me, and I did not imagine I should see him again that day. However it happened UBIQUITUS and myself were to dine at the same place. I called at the hour of invitation, and none of the company were missing but UBIQUITUS. When dinner had waited for him nearly half an hour, he came in so extremely exhausted with the fatigues of the morning, that I feared he had lost his appetite. He expressed a little regret that the company had waited for him, but observed, that they knew so well how difficult it was for him to be exact to his appointments, that no apology was requisite. I perceived, however, that his hurry did not prevent his doing justice to the dinner and wine, and indeed before evening he seemed well satisfied with the position he had taken.
SKETCH OF THE POLITICAL STATE OF AMERICA.
[Continued from our last.]
IN my last number I ventured a few general observations on the nature of some of the executive departments, and now proceed to suggest some further ideas on the subject of a secretary of domestic affairs and commissioner of trade, to be permanently established at the seat of government; whose duty it shall be to collect into one focus all possible information, from the various parts of the continent, which immediately or virtually respects agriculture, manufactures, and commerce, those pillars of national prosperity—and towards this design he shall correspond with the custom-house officers in the different States, and from them obtain accurate details of the amount of our exports, and imports, and their specific qualities—the number of American vessels employed in our commerce, with the number of men navigating them—their rates of ton-
nage, and the nature of the trade they carry on; also how many foreign vessels, and their channels of trade:—And in estimating the value of our imports, not to include the charge of duties—they being paid by the internal consumer, ought not to stand as a debit against the nation—but the duties on manufactures exported may be included in the credit, being paid by the foreign consumer:—This officer will also pay a nice attention to the increase of the raw materials and progress of the manufactures of the country—ascertaining what each State annually produces and manufactures, and what proportion the raw materials of home growth bear to those imported—and be able, well to discern what species of manufactures can in our present state be with advantage promoted, and without injury to other interests of the community—for this end he will encourage the introduction of machines so beneficial in a country having but few hands—he will also notice the population of the United States, their annual consumption, and the ratio of supply and demand—he will devise means to improve our agriculture—and promote our navigation—form plans for sailing our vessels least expensively—thereby assisting our carrying trade—he will explore the various channels for the extension of our commerce, &c.—When we consider the many difficulties which have attended the construction of our revenue system, for want of proper information from the several States in the Union, on many subjects included in this plan—when we view the advantage that must result from having persons officially possessed of such an accurate knowledge in the general state of the community, as to be able on a proposition for levying any imposts or other taxes, to determine how particular interests will be effected thereby—when we contemplate the benefit of having a trial-balance of our national trade, for correcting present and avoiding future errors—when we reflect on the great spring which the encouragement of trade and commerce gives to agriculture and manufactures—when in general we know the need of guarding the various fluctuations of the different interests in a State—of balancing them and directing them to one common centre—the public good:—I think these united considerations will evince the propriety of such an establishment as above alluded to, from the tendency it will have to communicate general information, to diffuse national views, establish national sentiments, to promote national interests, and to produce that concentration, system, and harmony, which must form the basis of our country's future prosperity and happiness.
In respect to a land-office, I have my doubts of the principle which in a degree leads to the necessity of such an establishment, viewing any encouragement to emigrate in the present state of our population, as building up the interior part of this country at the expence of the atlantic settlements, as totally opposed to an early attempt for manufacturing, as producing an undue proportion of certain interests, and being at present of no essential advantage to the progress of agriculture; but it has been here objected, that the spirit of emigration cannot be well stopped, or greatly checked—this being granted, it will be doubtless most politic to methodize the settlement of this western country, and pursue every means to encrease their future attachment and obedience to the present government.
AMERICANUS.
SKETCH OF PROCEEDINGS OF CONGRESS.
In the House of REPRESENTATIVES of the UNITED STATES.
TUESDAY, JUNE 16, 1789.
[A SKETCH of the DEBATE on the BILL for establishing the EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT for FOREIGN AFFAIRS, which took place on Tuesday last, upon Mr. WHITE's moving to strike out the words "to be removed from office by The President of the United States."]
Mr. WHITE observed, that the constitution had provided specifically only for the removal of the Judges of the Supreme Court—but as it had associated the Senate with the President in the appointment of officers, it was proper that the power of removal in the latter case, should be jointly exercised, as in the former.
Mr. SMITH (S. C.) was in sentiment with Mr. WHITE—he observed, that one of these two ideas are just, either that THE PRESIDENT had the power by the constitution, or he had not—if the power is vested in him by the constitution, the clause is nugatory—if it is not, the House can have no right to give it—This delegation of power is unconstitutional, agreeably to the idea of some very ingenious commentators upon the subject, who have asserted, that the Senate should have a voice in the removal, as well as the appointment of officers.—The author of the pieces under the signature of PUBLIUS, one of the most valuable performances extant—has fully expressed this sentiment.
If the constitution is examined with attention, we shall find that no such power is directly or impliedly given to the President—the departments of government are defined—the powers

vested in The President are declared—but no such power as this is pointed out—so far from it, the mode of removal is particularly specified, and that is upon conviction, after impeachment before the Senate: As the constitution is thus explicit, it follows, that this house can have no right to confer the power designated in the clause.
The reason for giving this power is the necessity of removal in cases of incapacity; but for what cause can a man be removed from office, but for mal-practices or misdemeanors? Is sickness or ignorance a sufficient reason? and who is to judge of incapacity or ignorance, unless by reason of either some offence is committed? In that case the removal is not for incapacity, but for the offence, and let me ask for the instance of dismissal for the former?
This clause invests a power in The President, which will be liable to great abuses; for we are not always to expect a chief magistrate in whom such entire confidence can be placed as in the present—the splendor of whose virtues, some gentlemen, appear to be so dazzled with, as to lose sight of a proper respect to futurity. The constitution is not calculated upon the idea of having the chair always so well filled; checks and guards are therefore provided—this is our only directory: An officer who is subjected to the whims of a capricious man, will be in an abject, dependent state: a mere slave; what is the consequence? we subject a fellow citizen to lose his reputation, his property, his living without a trial; men of independent principles will be cautious of placing themselves in such a situation; as a President might have round him those who envious of the honors and emoluments of persons in office, would be constantly intriguing and insinuating suspicions to effect their removal.
To be removed from office without a specified crime, or without a trial is contrary to the spirit of the constitution; is contrary to the free sentiments of this people: Some gentlemen have supposed that the present case is one of those to be provided for by legislative regulations; it appears however from the foregoing observations, that the mode proposed is unconstitutional; and upon the whole it is evident, that as the power is not given to the President by the constitution, it ought not to be delegated to him.
Mr. HUNTINGTON followed Mr. SMITH, and made a few observations upon “responsibility,” shewing that its importance was principally derived from the character in which it was fixed, and not from the idea in itself considered—he was opposed to the clause as dangerous.
Mr. SEDGWICK adverted to several cases, which would render removals from office necessary, which were not provided for by the constitution—and which the mode by impeachment from the length of process, and various difficulties always realized, would be found totally inadequate to remedy—he pointed out the necessity of speedy and prompt decision, when a man had become odious and unpopular in his office, without committing a positive offence when his talents were found deficient, and there was an incurable negligence and indolence in his attention to the duties of his office—when his political principles were become odious to the people, and his talents, instead of being exerted for the public good, were directed to prosecuting schemes of personal aggrandizement, in such and similar cases, it would be necessary to adopt something more summary than the slow, defultory process by impeachment.
Upon the principle of gentlemen, opposed to the clause—the Senate must be always in session—This he hoped would not take place—but in the absence of this body, what was to be done? must the public interest be sacrificed? must justice be delayed, by keeping an unworthy officer in his post, till the Senate could be collected from the extremities of this continent?
The danger of abuses had been enlarged upon; but were there no danger on that account from the Senate? the argument in his opinion, applied with equal force—and the power in the hands of a body chosen from various parts of the union, under the impression of various and different principles, was as liable to abuse if not more so, than if placed in the hands of the man, whom the united voice of the people should call to the office of chief magistrate.
Mr. MADISON coincided with Mr. SMITH, so far as that we ought to adhere strictly to the spirit and meaning of the constitution—He was however opposed to the motion for striking out the clause.—The present question was considered in various points of view; it therefore came properly before the legislature to decide upon it: If the proposed clause is merely a declaration of the constitution, it can do no harm; If it relates to a doubtful part, it lays with the whole legislature to give an explanation: And if the constitution is totally silent, Congress may use its discretion: The power is a high and important one; and therefore a decision merits a full and free discussion of both sides of the question: When it is considered, that the chief magistrate is to be selected from the mass of the citizens, by the united suffrages of three millions of people; notwithstanding the weakness incident to a popular election, he could not suppose that a vicious or bad character would be chosen.
If there is a country upon earth in which an effectual security is provided against the elevation of an unworthy man to the first seat in government, it is the United States. It is evidently the policy of the Constitution, that great responsibility should be lodged in The President, with respect to the executive department; but this responsibility is abated or destroyed so far as the officers to whom the duties of this department are committed, are not amenable to him: Should the Senate be associated with The President in the power of removal, the officers would very probably rest the retaining their places upon the favor of the Senate, in preference to that of The President, and would accordingly consider themselves as accountable principally to the Senate; in that case all executive responsibility would be impracticable, or the expectation of it, unjust.
The officers may by connecting themselves with the Senate in a cabal against The President, lay a foundation for perpetual discord, and in that way effectually destroy his responsibility, and defeat the expectation of the people from the institution of an independent executive branch.
From an attentive examination of the Constitution upon its true principle, it is at least problematical whether the House is not tied down to the construction adopted in this clause of the bill.
So far as particular powers are invested in different and particular departments, a different appropriation of those powers is not warranted by the constitution; it will therefore be highly improper to blend those powers: If the executive powers are invested in The President, the legislature may not interfere in the exercise of those powers.
No gentleman will say, that the judicial power should be vested in anybody, other than that designated by the constitution: The executive power is in the hands of The President, and is there any particular exceptions to this general principle? There is an exception: The constitution has declared, that in the appointment of officers, the Senate shall have a voice, unless in cases of inferior officers, the law shall otherwise direct.
Has Congress a right to extend this exception? No. If the constitution has in general vested all executive powers in one branch, the legislature has no right to diminish or modify them, any farther than is expressly provided by the constitution.
The question resolves itself into this: Is the power of displacing officers an executive, or legislative power? I conceive (said he) that no power can be more compleatly executive than that of appointing, inspecting and controuling those, who have the immediate administration of the laws. If the constitution had not provided, that in the appointment of officers, The President should have the advice and consent of the Senate; would it not be evident that the being possessed of the executive powers would have a right to appoint them? Could Congress in this case, have a right to say that the concurrence of the Senate should be necessary in such appointments? Most certainly not: And if not how can it be said with propriety, that Congress has a right to associate these branches, in order to dismiss them.
This clause may therefore be considered as explanatory of the constitution, and if the foregoing reasoning is just, it comports with its spirit and meaning; but if it is a doubtful point, it is the duty of the legislature to decide upon it.
Mr. VINING observed, that he was sorry that this question was again made the subject of discussion.
The committee who brought in the bill, (of which he had the honor to be one) thought themselves obliged by the former decision of the House to insert the clause now objected to: The House, (said he) has determined that the power of removing officers, shall be lodged where the responsibility resides: The circuitous route of impeachments has been well pointed out by the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Sedgwick) the slow, dilatory and inefficient process by that mode, is demonstrated by universal experience. The case of Warren Hastings is an eternal stigma upon the system of Impeachments: What delays! what suspension of the public service!
Suppose a secretary of foreign affairs in this situation: The forms of a full trial; the collecting of evidences; the charges and arguments of the parties, and a deliberate decision, may perpetuate the business for years.
It certainly could not be in the contemplation of the Senate to take away the responsibility of The President: Incapacity is not impeachable: Must the public service suffer by depriving The President of the power to remove an officer thus circumstanced? I trust, Sir, the clause will not be struck out.
Mr. WHITE supported his motion—He considered impeachments unnecessary to be applied to all occasions: They were proper as they respected officers who were to hold their places during good behavior: these were The President, Vice-President, and the Supreme Judges; but as the principle, that the power of removal ought to rest with the power that appointed did not apply to the two first, there was no mode of removal for them, but by impeachment before the Senate.
He had no idea that such an officer as the Minister of Foreign Affairs should not be removed but by impeachment: It might be highly inexpedient to have the reasons of his dismissal publicly known: In that case, The President, with advice of Senate, might have power to remove him without assigning any cause: The constitution implied this, as it provided that the JUDGES only should hold their places during good behavior.
He differed from his colleague in the principle which he had advanced, That the whole executive power was vested exclusively in The President in all cases where the Constitution had not specified an exception: The Constitution had given the Senate a voice in the appointment of officers, and they certainly had a power to dismiss from office.
It had been urged, that the power could be more safely entrusted with The President; but the House was bound to adhere to the Constitution, that prescribed certain limits, which the legislature could not exceed: No officer could be legally dismissed without a trial; upon the clause in debate, an officer might be retained in office, contrary to the sentiments of the Legislature.
To obviate the difficulties which it had been suggested would arise upon the plan which he thought the constitution pointed out, he supposed that The President might be invested with the power of a temporary suspension and appointment of officers in the recess of the Senate; but an absolute power for those purposes cannot be given consistently with the Constitution.
Mr. BOUDINOT was in favor of the clause; he observed, That much had been said upon the subject; but its importance was so great, as rendered a full discussion necessary, and could not be considered as time lost. If the power contended for, could in the least infringe the Constitution, or the rights of the several branches of the Legislature, he would most heartily oppose it. But the clause he considered as a legislative construction of the Constitution, which it was highly necessary to settle at the present time. Nothing can be shewn to prove that removals are to take place only by impeachments. The reasoning of those who contend for the power's being invested in The President, does not conclude against the remedy by impeachment; it only proves that there is another mode provided in the Constitution.
It is proper and necessary that the power of removal should reside somewhere; but this power does not prevent impeachments of any officer, however protected by the favor of him in whom that power is vested. The Constitution says, that an officer shall be removed by impeachment; but it does not say, that he shall not be removed without impeachment: The Constitution does not say, that that shall be the only mode: It has given the Senate a voice in appointing; but this by no means implies a right of removing. Suppose The President should complain to the Senate of the misconduct of an officer, what would be the consequence, if the Senate should take upon themselves to be judges? Would they not call upon the accused to state the reasons of his conduct? Would not such an investigation place the President in a situation inferior to the Senate? And should the Senate decide in favor of the officer, what would The President's situation then be?
He considered the Senate as the only security and barrier between the House and the President, and in this view, as a Court of Judicature, to operate as a check between them. This security ought to be in a situation always to be appealed to, and to guard against his misconduct: If the Senate is not this independent body, there is no resort left to the House: If the President was unduly attached to an officer, who was obnoxious to the people, and was determined to support him; in consequence of the public clamor, he should be compelled to bring the matter before the Senate, and they should decline removing him—would they be unbiased and unprejudiced to hear the impeachment that should be made by the House? They would be improper judges, having prejudged and pledged themselves to acquit the offender: The same difficulty might occur in an attempt to impeach the President for refusing to dismiss an unfaithful and odious officer.
In cases of sickness or incapacity, if the President is not invested with a power of removal, will the people submit to such officers? Divest the President of this power, and you destroy his responsibility: We ought not to leave this matter to the slow operations of law: The government in this case would suffer an interregnum: We must leave this responsibility with The President, or we shall effectually defeat the operation of the Constitution.
Mr. SMITH (S. C.) in reply observed, That gentlemen on the opposite side of the question were not consistent with themselves. Some contended that the power of removal was given by the Constitution; others that this House ought to give it; the question therefore recurred, either the Constitution has given the power to the President when it is unnecessary; or it has not given it, in which case it is improper for this House to do it. Gentlemen have said, that it is the duty of the Legislature to construe this point; but this House has no right to expound the Constitution—neither has the Senate: It will be an infringement of the rights of the Judiciary: If one House has this right, the other is equally entitled to it, and on a question in which each was concerned, they would see with different eyes, and disagree in their expositions. Much mischief has arisen in the several States from legislative constructions of their Constitutions. It appears to me (Mr. SMITH further observed,) that this House has no more right to invest the President with this power, than we have to invest ourselves with it.
The mode of impeachment for crimes will not be tedious and dilatory as some gentlemen seem to suppose: There will be no juries in such cases; and to be protected from the summary modes used in foreign despotic countries, is the glorious privilege of freemen. Gentlemen have said that the Constitution makes no provision for cases of delirium, incapacity, &c. let the law then provide for such cases. The power contended for is not drawn from precedent; there is no such power given by the State Constitutions, upon the principles of which, the system under which we are now deliberating is founded. Mr. SMITH concluded by adverting to several historical facts—and by observing that the forms of law were designed to secure the rights of the subject, and might prove highly necessary to guard a deserving officer from injustice, and popular phrensy.
Mr. GERRY was opposed to the clause—He supposed it would invest a power in the President to annul the most essential checks of the Constitution: He thought that if it was considered as merely a question of expediency, there was danger of making a breach in the constitution; if it is a constitutional question, every idea of expediency should be abandoned. He was for a strict adherence to the constitution; he conceived that no construction of that, would warrant delegating such a power to the President: It was conceded by some gentlemen in favour of the clause, that the constitution was not definite upon the subject, and if there was a doubt, it did not allow the liberty of a discretionary construction.
Mr. AMES observed, that every question which touches the constitution is a serious question: In order to obtain the advantages which are to be expected from the constitution, powers are delegated. To guard against abuses, checks are provided: That an officer should be removed, when the reasons which gave rise to his appointment, no longer exist, will not be disputed; but the question is, how this is to be done? There is no government in which the officers hold their places during good behaviour: The officers of the judiciary, from the nature and peculiar delicacy of their trust, were formed into a distinct branch, and hold their offices upon that tenure; but in respect to others, acting in aid of the President, who were appointed upon different principles, and for different purposes, it is necessary that they should hold their places during pleasure: The confidence which the government has in the virtues and abilities of an officer, should be the only ground of his appointment, and the only bond of connection between him and his principal; when that confidence ceases, the power under whose direction he acts, should certainly have power to displace him.
There may be numerous and various causes of removal, which do not amount to a crime: If it is admitted that officers ought to be dismissed when their continuance operates to the injury of government, whether innocent or not of any crime, the only question then is, how and by whom they shall be displaced? Impeachments are not the only mode to be resorted to. In the British government officers are removed immediately when they become odious and can no longer render service to the public: While the forms of impeachment are preparing, the mischief may be done: It may as frequently be necessary to prevent as to punish crimes. The situation and advantages of the supreme executive, will furnish him with the means to detect a villainous design, before it is ripe for execution; he might, for example, discover in the officers of the treasury a project for embezzling the public money; some sudden and decisive remedy would in such case be indispensable.
It is generally agreed, that removals will be a proper remedy; the question is by whom? If the constitution is against the power, being vested in The President, there is an end of the enquiry. The committee ought to be clear that the constitution is opposed. The gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Madison) has made so many just remarks to prove the constitutionality of this power, that it is unnecessary to go over the ground again.
If it should be granted that the constitution is silent, it certainly comes within the cognizance of the Legislature. The powers of the several branches ought not to be blended. The President is the executive; this is confessedly an executive power: It is not creating a new power; it already exists, and is as great now as it will be when particularly appropriated. Officers should have the terror of punishment constantly held over their heads for delinquency.—The immediate influence and controul of the President over his assistants is necessary, it is the essence of good government. That responsibility which is so important and absolutely necessary, can never be found in the Senate: besides, the blending of distinct powers always produces a corruption of those powers; for this reason the Senate should never have the power of interfering: Protection for protection in office, will be the consequence, and a numerous train of evils more easily foreseen than remedied.—Upon the whole, there appears to be three opinions upon the subject before the committee, the first is, that investing this power in the President, is against the constitution—the second, that it is not—and the third is, that the constitution is silent with respect to it: It is therefore necessary that the House should come to a declaration; if that declaration is right, it will become a rule; if not, the Judges will determine it.
Mr. LIVERMORE was opposed to the clause, and urged several reasons for striking it out.—Adjourned.
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 17.
In committee of the whole, upon the bill for establishing the department of foreign affairs—the question whether the clause which invests the President with the power of removing officers should be struck out, still under consideration, and was largely debated; but no decision was had upon the question when the committee rose, and the House adjourned.
THURSDAY, JUNE 18.
A petition from ROBERT FRAZIER was read and laid on the table.
The Senate sent down the bill upon tonnage, in which they have concurred with amendments—these amendments being read, the order of the day was called for, when the House went into a committee of the whole; and the subject of yesterday's debate was resumed: The committee sat until near four o'clock, and then rose without coming to a vote upon the question.
FRIDAY, JUNE 19.
House met agreeably to adjournment, and formed itself into a committee of the whole, upon the bill for establishing the Department of Foreign Affairs. The motion which had been under debate since Tuesday, for striking out the clause which empowers the President to remove officers, still under consideration. Lengthy debates ensued—sketches of which shall appear in our next. The question upon the motion being at length taken, it passed in the negative, 33 being in favor of retaining the clause, and 20 against it.
The committee then proceeded in the discussion of the bill. Mr. BENSON proposed the following clause for insertion, viz. That the Secretary for the Department of Foreign Affairs immediately after his appointment, be empowered to take into his custody all the books and papers belonging to the late Department of Foreign Affairs established by the United States in Congress assembled: This clause was adopted.
The further discussion of the bill produced some alterations and amendments, which being completed, the committee rose, and the chairman made his report. The Speaker having taken the chair, a message was received by the Secretary from the Senate, with the impost bill, informing the Honorable House that they insisted on some of the amendments which they had proposed, and receded from others.
The Secretary also informed the Honorable House, that the committee appointed to view the rooms in the Federal Hall, had proceeded in that business and made a partial report, which was now sent down for concurrence.—Adjourned until Monday.
[The Debates of the Hon. House of Representatives of the United States upon the Clause in the Bill for establishing the Department of Foreign Affairs, which empowers The President to remove the Officer at the head of that department, without advice of Senate, have been highly interesting, animated, and ingenious. The galleries have been unusually crowded, notwithstanding the heat of the weather; and the most profound attention observed. The zeal and earnestness, with which the several Speakers have supported the argument on both sides of the question, fully demonstrate the deep conviction which they felt of the importance of the subject. This discussion has served to unfold and explain the principles of the Constitution; and the extreme anxiety which has been shown to adhere to its spirit and meaning, by every one of the Speakers, evinces that they all consider it as the only rule of their Faith and Practice, in the course of their Political Existence.]

DOMESTIC ARTICLES.
SAVANNA, MAY 28.
Extract of a letter from Col. Maxwell to Lieut. Col. Fishbourn, dated Midway (Liberty-County) May 24.
Last Tuesday there was a train of Indians discovered, making for this settlement, by a few men employed as spies. I immediately issued orders for embodying the militia, and three small parties were collected on the frontiers that night. On Wednesday morning, as soon as Dr. Le Conte's negroes turned out of the fort, the Indians attempted to seize on them. Six fellows went out with guns; as soon as the negroes discovered the Indians, they made back for the fort, and the Indians pursued them; there were some negroes in the fort with arms, who, with the Doctor, fired on them, whilst those who went out armed attacked them in the rear, which soon made them retreat, with some loss, to a fence, where they kept up a heavy fire at the fort, for some time, without effect. They carried off three negroes. Several parties of men soon got to the place, but pursued without waiting to collect a force sufficient to attack them. Capt. Frazer, with a small party, came up with them on the side of a swamp, which they immediately ran into, and prevented his charging them. It appears from the best accounts, that there are at least fifty in that party. The next morning they killed a man at a plantation of Capt. Sander's, just below the one which he now plants; and on Friday night they attacked a small guard within a mile and a half of me, the guard beat them off with the loss of one man killed. They carried off a negro wench and a child a small distance from the place, stabbed the wench in several places with a knife, scalped her, and killed the child; the wench has come in, but is not expected to live. Yesterday evening, at Mr. Stephen Baker's, three of his negroes went over the fence, who were fired on, and a wench killed and scalped. An attempt to plunder was likewise made at Mr. James Wood's on Friday, but the negroes discovered the savages at a distance, and made their escape. They seem to have separated into small parties, and to be all round us. A party is to go out to-morrow morning. It is thought, by the different trails that have been discovered since, that there are other parties come into the settlements besides that which attacked Le Conte; if so, there is no telling what their numbers are. The two men killed by the Indians in Liberty county were, Mr. Grimes and Mr. James Cole.
WINCHESTER, JUNE 3.
[From a Correspondent.] "A great majority of the House of Representatives in Congress, appear to be a band of patriots: It may be observed in the Debates, however, that some gentlemen who pass for men of sense, are against a discrimination on tonnage. This is a matter of astonishment to a person who sees that the sale of American oil and rice in France, is superior to all advantages in commerce that Britain can give the United States. Britain displays such rapacity for self-interest and monopoly, that no American of liberal sentiments can hesitate to make a discrimination between her and France. They who do, appear to be ignorant of the interests of the United States, or fail to pursue it."
"Do these gentlemen intend that we shall be as passive in our traffic with Europe as the Turks are? The Dutch, English, and French, carry their commodities, and sell them in the Turkish dominions, and bring back the commodities of Turkey in the same bottom: Hence arises the great difficulty which the Porte labours under to man and maintain a navy, notwithstanding the absolute power of this Court. Such men discover a timid diffidence which borders on meanness—they are afraid to do what is absolutely necessary, to establish a revenue, and consequently, the credit of their country, least the British should do something to counteract it: Such pusillanimous conduct will never command respect in commerce or in war."
"It is observed by some gentlemen, that Britain takes our flax seed—It is not to oblige us; it is because it answers far better, and with more certainty of a crop than seed from Holland, or any part of the European continent—that they take our potash and naval stores. If the bad blood which originated in the armed neutrality, should get a little more inflamed, Britain would be obliged to depend on us in a great measure for pitch, tar, turpentine, and other naval stores. Russia and Denmark will not supply her, and so many of the Swedes will be employed in arms, that they cannot furnish her with a sufficient quantity. In this situation, I would use the Britons with civility, and establish more of a reciprocity in trade, than their short sighted policy, and interested selfish views would permit them to grant to America."
"Besides the other great obligations which the United States lie under to France, we owe them a large sum of money; and notwithstanding the unfortunate situation of their own finances, they forbear to press us: Our ingratitude to France would be next to our ingratitude to Heaven: She was an instrument in the hand of Providence, to bring us to what we are."
"A great deal has been said on the scarcity of shipping to carry the bulky commodities of America to market. It is generally allowed, that the States to the eastward have more shipping than is necessary for their own carriage: Let them by all means have the preference—What they get is all in the family. They are an industrious enterprising people—and knowing their interest, and being attached to it, will prevent their being exorbitant in their demands for freight, as it would operate against them, and induce every state to provide themselves in shipping as fast as possible, to serve their own purposes."
"Let a person of judgment, acquainted with shipping and materials for building, consider the immense quantities of live oak and cedar in the Southern States; and pines so lofty, that it tires the eye to look at the top; many of them four feet diameter—and he will see, that an active enterprising people will, in a short time, not only supply the United States with shipping sufficient for their own carriage, but will carry on a profitable commerce by building, freighting, and selling the ships in Europe."
"It is disagreeable to observe some men insist on lowering the impost, before they know the amount of it, or are informed of the sums of money necessary for the support of government, the payment of the interest of our debts, and for establishing a sinking fund to pay off the principal debts by installments: The speeches of such persons serve only to expose them to ridicule, and prove how incompetent they are to establish a revenue, and make laws for a great and rising empire."
"America has great reason to thank Providence that a large majority of the House of Representatives discover greater abilities and more knowledge of the Times."
BOSTON, JUNE 13.
Yesterday the joint committee of the legislature reported to the Hon. Senate, the address to THE PRESIDENT of the United States.
That firm reliance on Heaven—that spirit of piety, and moderation—which breathes in every line which has come from THE PRESIDENT, will remain a record to posterity, as honorable as his brilliant achievements both in the field and the cabinet—and will perpetuate his fame more than the song of the poet—the page of the historian—the marble monument, or studied inscription.
NEW-YORK, JUNE 20, 1789.
A FEDERAL SONG.
For the Anniversary of AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE.
To the tune of "RULE BRITANNIA."
I. YE friends to this auspicious day! Come join the federal, festive band, And all Columbia—homage pay To him who freed thy happy land. Hail Columbia! Columbia's Genius, hail! Freedom ever shall prevail.
II. Brave, just, and generous, wife, sincere, Thy virtues cheer each drooping Son; And thy proud Rivals—half revere Columbia's Genius, WASHINGTON. Hail Columbia! &c.
III. No more shall Envy blast our fame, Or Jealousy our hearts divide, The BAND OF BROTHERS—now proclaim The knot indissolubly ty'd. Hail Columbia! &c.
IV. No more shall Discord cloud the day That gave to INDEPENDENCE birth, Henceforth we'll spurn the Fiend away, And drown our fears in wine and mirth. Hail Columbia! &c.
V. Now LIBERTY, by HEAV'N's command, Returns to bless Columbia's shore; Well pleas'd, she views the happy land, And cries, I'll wander now no more. Hail Columbia! &c.
VI. In this my last asylum blest, Columbia shall my Empire own, And HE who won me—stand confest The faithful guardian of my throne. Hail Columbia! &c.
VII. COMMERCE shall rear her drooping head, And open all her copious stores, Her ships their lofty pinions spread, To wait them to remotest shores. Hail Columbia! &c.
VIII. Ye FAIR who grace Columbia's plains! To you my Sons shall homage pay, And though they scorn a tyrant's chains, Shall bow to Beauty's sov'reign sway. Hail Columbia! &c.
IX. On this bright dawn of HALCYON days, Let federal friends in concert join To pour, while they the flask can raise Libations to the God of Wine. Hail Columbia! Columbia's Genius, hail! Freedom ever shall prevail. E. C.
The important decision on the motion, for striking out a clause in the bill which had been for several days before the committee of the House of Representatives of the United States, has quieted the fears of many friends to the Union, who had been uneasy, lest the blending of the Legislative and Executive Powers of Government, should at some future period have produced diffidence, corruption and debility, in the Legislature of the United States.
His Most Christian Majesty's Packet Le Telemache, L'HOTELIER commander, will sail for Bourdeaux the first of July next.
THE PRESIDENT has been indisposed with a slight fever, for a few days past; but the public anxiety may be abated, by the assurance that he is now much better.
We are informed, that His Excellency THOMAS JEFFERSON, Minister Plenipotentiary from the United States to the Court of France, has requested leave to visit America: and that THE PRESIDENT has granted him permission accordingly.
We further learn, that this event was made known to the Senate on Wednesday last by a message from THE PRESIDENT, who at the same time was pleased to nominate WILLIAM SHORT, Esq. Charge des Affaires for the United States, at that Court, during the absence of Mr. JEFFERSON.
The nomination, we hear, is confirmed by the Senate.
Every friend to the happiness and freedom of America, contemplates with pleasure, the increase and diffusion of learning in their rising States.—A laudable spirit pervades the various societies and associations of citizens, to extend the means of knowledge and information. Schools and other seminaries of learning, are continually encressing—the inhabitants of this city discover a laudable ambition on this account—and the public papers are daily announcing the literary improvements, and exhibitions of the youth, taught at the several academies.
The exhibition of the pupils of Mr. HARDIE, at the city-tavern, on Wednesday evening, was attended by a very large and respectable company. The performances of the several parts assigned to the young gentlemen, gave great pleasure to the spectators. The grace, the animation and propriety, of the action and pronunciation of the several scholars, were honorary to themselves, and reflected great credit upon their preceptor.
The 11th inst. being the day for the general assembly of the State of Rhode Island, agreeable to a resolve passed at their late session, to take into consideration a motion made for calling a convention, to adopt the new constitution—the same was accordingly taken up, and after the matter was discussed, the vote was taken, and there was a majority of eleven against calling a convention. The motion made for repealing the tender law was also taken into consideration, and it also passed in the negative, by a majority of seven.
The diminution of the majority against the Federal Constitution in the State of Rhode-Island, is indicative of the complete triumph of reason and common sense over the power of anarchy, selfishness and party views: Rhode-Island and North-Carolina will undoubtedly soon be restored to the Union, when there will be more joy over two returning wanderers, than over eleven dutiful sons, who have never strayed from the Temple of Union.
The friends to the constitution of the United States, may rejoice in every circumstance that has attended its progress, from the beginning: The opposition to it, called forth in its defence and support the noblest faculties of the human mind: The full, free and unbounded discussion of its merits and defects, has served to emblazon its preponderating excellencies in such manner, that its foundation is extended, and made more firm and durable, than its most sanguine friends could have anticipated.
In proportion as knowledge diffuses itself, liberty spreads its genial rays. The French now make themselves happy in the idea of a free press: Those generous spirits who are burning with the flame of liberty, are now engaged in forming a scheme for the more equal representation of the people in the Etats Generaux; which they justly consider as the first gleam of liberty. An enlightened people collected into an assembly by equal representation, will soon acquire through their means every right that belongs naturally to man.
OUR COUNTRY.
WHAT an happy asylum does America present to the wretched inhabitants of the old world! Here—where vast tracts of country boast a soil and climate equal to the most fertile kingdoms of Europe! Here—where no lordly despot usurps the land to disposess the swain—where laws, and equal liberty are the lot of all—Here are they invited! Industry! especially in the United States, calls for an accession of artists; and agriculture alone is capable of maintaining those thousands and tens of thousands, who perish in supporting the false claims of Princes. The men, who must lose their lives in a single battle, accompanied with some of those damsels, who sacrifice their days in convents to family pride under the mask of devotion, would easily find that provision in any of our States, whether new or old, which would induce them to exchange a life of rapine or of celibacy, for the comforts of domestic life. Profligacy, which ranges at large in courts, camps, cities, and villages, would here be rendered useful to society. Religion, instead of being confined to a convent, like a candle under a bushel, might illuminate regions as yet in Pagan darkness; large districts where the foot of man has scarcely trod, might be turned into Edens; and the golden age, which never existed but in the brains of enthusiasts, might in some degree be realized in the American republics.
Of STYLES and TITLES.
HOW is it, if titles are not consistent with the genius of the people of America, as is asserted by some—that in almost all the Constitutions of the several States, there are express provisions made, for titles of distinction for the Supreme and other magistrates? And how is it, that common consent in every State, so readily agrees to the style of Honorable being given to various officers—such as Counsellors, Judges of various tribunals, Presidents of political bodies, Generals, &c. if they are really repugnant to the feelings and wishes of the people? Mass. Centinel.
ARRIVALS. NEW-YORK.
Wednesday, Packet Telemache, L'Hotelier, Bourdeaux. Thursday, Ship Flora, Sinnott, Newry, 36 days. Schooner Rebecca, Gale, Nova-Scotia, 24 days. Friday, Schooner Dove, Riggs, Baltimore, 15 days. — Sydney, Todd, do. 11 days, Sloop Polly, Sowers, Philadelphia, 3 days.

THE RIGHT CONSTITUTION OF A COMMON-WEALTH EXAMINED.
Continued from our last.
If, in reading history, the glosses and reflections of historians are taken implicitly, a mistaken judgment will often be formed. Rome was an aristocracy, and Livy an aristocratical writer. The constitution of government, the principles, prejudices, and manners of the times, should never be a moment out of sight. If we believe the Romans, Manlius was actuated only by envy and ambition; but if we consider his actions, and the form of government at the time, we should be very apt to pronounce him both a greater and a better man than Camillus. To speak candidly, there was a rivalry between the Manlian and the Quintian families, and the struggle was which should be the first family, and who the first man; and such a struggle exists, not only in every empire, monarchy, republic, but in every city, town, and village, in the world. But a philosopher might find as good reason to say that Manlius was sacrificed to the envy, jealousy, and ambition of Camillus and the Quintii, as that his popular endeavours for the plebeians sprung from envy of Camillus, and ambition to be the first man. Both were heads of parties, and had all the passions incident to such a situation: but if a judgment must be pronounced which was the best man and citizen, there are very strong arguments in favor of Manlius. The name of King was abhorred by the Romans. But who and what had made it so? Brutus, and his brother aristocrats, at the expulsion of Tarquin, by appointing religious execrations to be pronounced in the name of the whole State, and for all succeeding ages, against such as should dare to aspire to the throne. In this way any word or any thing may be made unpopular, at any time and in any nation. The Senate were now able to set up the popular cry, that Manlius aspired to the throne; this revived all the religious horror which their established execrations had made an habitual part of their natures, and turned an ignorant superstitious populace against the best friend, and the only friend they had in the republic. The Senate first talked of assassination and another Ahala; but, to be very gentle, they ordered "the magistrates to take care that the commonwealth sustained no prejudice from the pernicious designs of Manlius." This was worse than private assassination; it was an assassination by the Senate; it was judgment, sentence, and execution, without trial. The timid staring people were intimidated, and even the tribunes caught the panic, and offered to take the odium off the Senate, and cite Manlius before the tribunal of the people themselves, and accuse him in form. It is impossible not to suspect, nay fully to believe, that these tribunes were bribed secretly by the Senators. They not only abandoned him with whom they had co-operated, but they betrayed the people, their constituents, in the most infamous manner. They said, that in the present disposition Manlius could not be openly attacked without interesting the people in his defence; that violent measures would excite a civil war; that it was necessary to separate the interests of Manlius from those of the people: they themselves could cite him before the tribunal of the people, and accuse him in form. Nothing, said the tribunes, is less agreeable to the people than a King: as soon as the multitude sees that your aim is not against them; that from protectors they are become judges; that their tribunes are the accusers, and that a patrician is accused for having aspired to the tyranny, no interest will be so dear to them as that of their liberty. Their liberty! The liberty of plebeians at that time! What a prostitution of sacred terms! Yet, gross as was this artifice, it laid hold of those blind prejudices which patricians and aristocrats had inspired, and duped effectually a stupid populace. Manlius was cited by the tribunes before the people: in a mourning habit he appeared, without a single Senator, relation, or friend, or even his own brothers, to express concern for his fate: and no wonder; a Senator, and a person of consular dignity, was never known to have been so universally abandoned. But nothing can be more false than the reflections of historians upon this occasion: "So much did the love of liberty, and the fear of being enslaved, prevail in the hearts of the Romans over all the ties of blood and nature!" it was not love of liberty, but absolute fear which seized the people. The Senate had already condemned him by their vote, and given their consular dictatorial power against Manlius and his friends: the tribunes themselves were corrupted with bribes or fear; and no man dared expose himself to aristocratical vengeance, unprotected by the tribunes. To prove that it was fear, and not patriotism, that restrained his relations and friends, we need only recollect another instance. When Appius Claudius, the decemvir, was imprisoned for treason, much more clear than that of Manlius, and for conduct as wicked, brutal, and cruel, as Manlius appears virtuous, generous, and humane, the whole Claudian family, even C. Claudius, his professed enemy, appeared as supplicants before the judges, imploring mercy for their relation. His friends were not afraid. Why? because Claudius was an enemy and hater of the people, and therefore popular with most of the patricians. His crimes were aristocratical crimes, therefore not only almost venial, but almost virtues. Manlius's offence was love of the people; and democratical misdemeanors are the most unpardonable of all that can be committed or conceived in a government where the demon of aristocracy domineers. Livy himself betrays a consciousness of the insufficiency of the evidence to prove Manlius's guilt; he says he can discover no proof, nor any other charge of any crime of treason, "regni crimen," except some assemblies of people, seditious speeches, generosity to debtors, and the false imputation of the concealment of the gold. But here we see what the people are when they meet in one assembly with the Senators: they dare not vote against the opinion or will of the nobles and patricians. The aristocratical part of mankind ever did, and ever will, overawe the people, and carry what votes they please in general, when they meet together with the democratical part, either in a collective or representative assembly. Thus it happened here: superstition decided. While in sight of the capital, their religious reverence for the abode of Jupiter, saved and inhabited by Manlius, was a counterbalance to their fears and veneration for the Senators descended from the gods. The people could not condemn him in sight of the capital. The tribunes knowing what was in them, adjourned to another place the next day. The capital out of sight, and the Senators present, condemned their deliverer, and he died a sacrifice to the rancorous envy of his peers in the Senate, the consulate, and patrician order, who could not bear the sight of so splendid a distinction and elevation above themselves, in any one of their order, as Manlius's house upon the capital, and his title of Capitolinus. "Homines prope quadringeritos produxisse dicitur, quibus sine ferre ex-pensas pecunias tulisset, quorum bona venire, quos duci addictos prohibuisset. Ad hanc decoram quoque belli non commemorasse tantum, sed proculisse etiam conspicuenda; spolia hostium caesorum ad triginta, dona imperatorum ad quadraginta, in quibus inferre duas murales coronas, civicas octo. Ad hanc servatos ex hostibus civis produxisset, inter quos, C. Servilium magistrum equitum, absentem nominatum: et, quum ea quoque quae bello gesta essent, pro fastigio rerum, oratione etiam magnifica facta dictis aequando, memorasset, nudasse pectus insigni: cunctatibus bello accensus: et identidem capitulum spectans Jovem, deosque alios devocasse ad auxilium fortunaram suarum: precatumque est, ut, quam mentem sibi Capitolinam arcem protectentem ad salutem populi Romani dedisset, eam populo Romano in suo discrimine darent: et orasse singulos universosque, ut capitulum atque arcem intuentes, ut ad deos immortales verbi, de se judicarent."
By removing the assembly from the Campus Martius, where the people were assembled in centuries (centuriatum), to the Grove (Pecunium Lucum), from whence the capital could not be
seen, oblinatis animis triste judicium, with gloomy obstinacy the fatal sentence was passed, and the tribunes cast him down from the Tarpeian rock. "Such was the catastrophe," says Livy, "of a man who, if he had not lived in a free city, would have merited fame." He should have said, if he had not lived in a simple aristocracy, and alarmed the envy of his fellow aristocrats by superior merit, services, and rewards, especially that most conspicuous mark, his house upon the capitol, and his new title, or agnomen, Capitolinus, which mortal envy could not bear.
He was no sooner dead than the people repented and regretted him: a sudden plague that broke out was considered as a judgment from Heaven upon the nation, for having polluted the capitol with the blood of its deliverer. The history of Manlius is an unanswerable argument against a simple aristocracy; it is a proof that no man's liberty or life is safe in such a government: the more virtue and merit he has, the more in danger, the more certain his destruction. It is a good argument against a standing foreign and supreme authority in an hereditary aristocracy; so far Nedham quotes it pertinently, and applies it justly: but when the same example is cited to prove that the people in one supreme assembly, successively chosen, are the best keepers of their liberty, so far from proving the proposition, it proves the contrary, because that Camillus, the Quintii, and Manlius, will all be chosen into that one assembly by the people; the same emulation and rivalry, the same jealousy and envy, the same struggles of families and individuals for the first place, will arise between them. One of them will have the rich and great for his followers, another the poor; hence will arise two or three, or more parties, which will never cease to struggle till war and bloodshed decides which is the strongest. Whilst the struggle continues, the laws are trampled on, and the rights of the citizens invaded by all parties in turn; and when it is decided, the leader of the victorious army is emperor and despot.
(To be continued.)
AN ESSAY ON FREE TRADE AND FINANCES: Written by a citizen of Philadelphia, in 1783.
[Continued from our last.]
VII. This mode of taxing will give our treasury some compensation for the monies which our people pay towards the tax of other countries which they travel through, or reside in, when abroad. An American cannot travel through any country of Europe, and drink a bowl of punch or eat a dinner, but he contributes to the tax of the country; and if our taxes, like theirs, were laid on such luxurious consumptions as travellers usually indulge themselves in, their people who travel through our country or reside in it, would contribute towards our taxes, in like manner as our people who travel or reside in their countries, contribute to theirs; and as we expect that the intercourse between us and all the countries of Europe will be very great, it is highly reasonable that our treasury should receive the same benefit from their travellers among us, that their treasuries receive from our people who travel or reside among them, and a little attention to the subject, will be sufficient to convince any man, that this article is more than a trifle.
IX. This mode of taxing, which brings the burden of the tax principally on articles of luxury, or at most on articles of not the first necessity, gives easement and relief to our husbandry and manufactures, which are in danger of ruin from the present weight of taxes which lies on them. If we tax land, we lessen its value, and of course diminish the whole farming interest. If we tax poles, we in effect tax labor, which discourages it, and of consequence we cast a damp and deadening languor on the very first springs, the original principle and source of our national wealth, and wound the great staples of the country in their embryo. Now I think that any mode of taxing, which gives remedy and relief, against so great, so fatal an evil, would deserve consideration, even though it had not these advantages in its favor, which I have before enumerated. I have heard a stupid and cruel argument urged, that taxing labor has this advantage, that it promotes industry, because it increases necessity. This argument proves in a very cogent manner, that 'tis best to make every body poor, because it will make them work the harder. I should think it would be more humane and liberal in a government to manage the public administration so, that industry might have all possible encouragement, that it might be rather animated by an increase of happiness and hope of reward, than goaded on by dire necessity, and the dreadful spurs of pinching want. I freely give it as my clear and decided opinion, that 'tis the interest, duty and best policy of every government, to give all possible ease, exoneration, and encouragement to that industry, those occupations and kinds of business which most enrich, strengthen, and happily a nation, and to lay the burdens of government as far as possible on those fashions, habits and practices, which tend to weaken, impoverish and corrupt the people, and therefore that any mode of taxing which tends to encourage the first of these and discourage the last, is worthy of the most serious attention.
But perhaps the advantage of this kind of taxation will appear in a more striking light, by considering its practical and general effects, on a nation which adopts it, in which view of the matter I think it will be very manifest.
I. That any man of business, whether he be merchant, farmer or tradesman, may live easier and better, i. e. be happier through the year and richer at the end of it, in a country where this tax is paid, than he could live in the same country, if the tax was not paid; for as the tax is laid on useless consumptions, it would of course diminish those consumptions, and of course save the first cost of the part diminished, and all the additional expence which the use of that part would require. If a man lives in a country abounding in luxury, he must go in some degree into it or appear singular and mean, and that part which he would be in a manner compelled to adopt, would probably cost him more than his tax; but 'tis here to be considered, that the first cost of an article of luxury, is not near all the cost of it. One article often makes another necessary, and that a thing, and so on almost ad infinitum, if you buy a silk cloak, there must also be trimmings, and that will not do without a hat or bonnet, and there requires a suitable accommodation in every other part of the dress, in order to keep up any sort of decency and uniformity of appearance, and there also must be spent a great deal of time to put these fine things on, and to wear them, to show them, to receive and pay visits, in them, &c. And when this kind of luxury prevails in a country beyond the degree which its wealth can bear; the consequence is pride, poverty, debt, duns, lawsuits, &c. &c. The farmer finds the proceeds of the year vanished into trifles; the merchant and tradesman may sell their goods indeed, but can't get payment for them. Every family finds its expence greatly increased, and the time of the family much consumed in attending to that very expence. Many families soon become embarrassed, and put to very mortifying shifts to keep up that appearance, which such a corrupt taste almost compels them to support: But were these families with the same income, to live in a country of more economy and less luxury, they would easily pay the taxes on the luxuries they did use, keep on a good footing with their neighbours—appear with as much distinction—live happy and unembarrassed through the year, and have money in their pockets at the end of it. In such a country, payments would be punctual, husbandry and mechanic arts, might be carried on with ease and success. These are no high colourings, but an appeal to plain facts, and I here with confidence ask every wife man, if he would not choose to live in a country where articles of hurtful luxury and high in their price, as to prevent the excessive use of them, rather than in a country where such articles were of easy acquirement, and the use of them so excessive among the inhabitants, as to consume their wealth, destroy their industry, and corrupt the morals and health of the people.
II. I think it is very plain, that articles of hurtful and useless consumption are making such rapid progress among us, and growing into such excessive use, as to throw the economy, industry, simplicity, and even health of our people into danger, and of consequence raising the price of such articles so high as will be necessary to produce a proper check to the excessive use of them, will require a tax great, as when added to a small and very moderate impost on articles of general and necessary consumption, will bring money enough into the public treasury, for all the purposes of the public service. We will suppose then that all this is done, and when this is done, we will stop a moment and look round us, and view the advantages resulting from this measure, over and above the capital one of checking and restraining that excessive luxury that threatens, if not an absolute destruction, yet at least a tamishment of every principle out of which our prosperity, wealth and happiness must necessarily and for ever flow. I say, we'll stop a minute and view the advantageous effects of this measure. The first grand effect which presents itself to my view is, that our army would be paid, that our brethren, our fellow citizens, who, by their valor, their patience, their country, and all its blessings will be enabled to return to their friends and connexions, not only crowned with the laurels of the field, but rewarded by the justice and gratitude of their country, and be thereby enabled to support their dignity of character, or at least be put on a footing with their fellow-citizens (whom they have saved) in the procurement of the means of living.
The next advantage of this measure which occurs to me is, the easement and exoneration of the laborers of the community, the husbandman and tradesman, out of whose labour all our wealth and supplies are derived, by them we are fed, by them we are clothed, by the various modifications of their labour, our staples are produced, our commerce receives its principle, and our utmost abundance is supplied, we are therefore bound by every principle of justice, gratitude and good policy, to give them encouragement and uninterrupted security in their peaceful occupations, and not by an unnatural and ill-fated arrangement of our finances, compel them to leave their labours, which are the grand object of their attention and our supplies, to go and hunt up money to satisfy a collector of taxes.
(To be continued.)
NATIONAL MONITOR.—No. IX.
"The traveller who o'er the country flies, Few subjects with a just discernment spies; Objects that pass to quick, confound the mind, And no distinct ideas leave behind."
AN ingenious writer in some of our public papers, hath observed, that to compleat the education of those youth, who may be destined to public life in the Legislature of the Union, such an intimate acquaintance with the several States is necessary, as can be obtained only by a temporary residence in each—and from hence inferred the importance of making the tour of the continent.
The knowledge that is derived from study, however, systematic and theoretic, is often found inadequate—an acquaintance with the real state of facts furnishes irresistible arguments, when the most ingenious theories prove radically defective—hence we find that experience has the advantage of speculation; and an accurate idea of positive, existing circumstances, a great superiority in leading to the best decisions upon all occasions.
The tour of this continent is without doubt of as much consequence to the citizens of these States, as that of Europe ever was to the inhabitants of Great-Britain, and in many respects of much greater.
In Europe they travel to acquire a knowledge of the habits, manners, laws, history, &c. of foreign countries. Americans should travel to obtain just ideas of the various and diversified people who compose not a foreign nation, but one in whose fate their own is immediately involved.
Let it not be said, that variety, novelty, antiquity, and splendor are wanting to excite the attention, to amuse, to animate, and instruct the American traveler—America was always an object of delightful contemplation to the philosopher in every part of the globe—but since the adoption of the new constitution—She is raised to a most respectable grade in the scale of nations—and her progress to perfection opens a new field of speculation to the human mind. That information therefore which can be derived from travel only, is now become of infinite importance to the legislators, the statesmen and the patriots of our country. C.
(The subject to be continued.)
This Day is published, (Price 2/6) And to be sold by BERRY & ROGERS, Hanover-Square, by ROBERT HODGE, Corner of King and Queen-Street, and by the EDITOR hereof;
T W E N T Y - S I X L E T T E R S, UPON INTERESTING SUBJECTS, RESPECTING THE REVOLUTION OF AMERICA. Written in Holland in the Year M,DCC,LXXX. BY HIS EXCELLENCY JOHN ADAMS, WHILE HE WAS SOLE MINISTER PLENIPOTENTIARY FROM THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FOR NEGOTIATING A PEACE, AND A TREATY OF COMMERCE, WITH GREAT-BRITAIN.
ADVERTISEMENT. Prefixed to the Letters. DR. CALKOEN, an eminent Civilian at Amsterdam, to whom these letters were written, composed, by the means of them, a comparison between the revolt of the Low Countries from Spain, and the revolution of the United States of America; in which he concluded, upon the whole, that "as it was a kind of miracle that the former succeeded, it would be a greater miracle still if the latter should not."—This composition was read by him to a society of gentlemen of letters, about forty in number, who met sometimes at Amsterdam; and by its means just sentiments of American affairs began to spread in that country, and to prevail over the continual misrepresentations of certain gazettes and emissaries—The publications of General Howe and BURGGOYNE, in vindication of themselves, were procured to be translated into French, and propagated, together with many other pamphlets, which assayed in the same design, and contributed to excite the citizens to those applications, by petition to the regencies of the several cities, which finally procured the acknowledgement of American Independence, the Treaty of Commerce, and a Loan of Money. JOHN ADAMS.
Published by JOHN FENNO, No. 9, MAIDEN-LANE, near the Osgoode-Market, NEW-YORK.—[gold. tr. an.]