Alexandria gazette, commercial and political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1812-1817, 1816-02-14
.enea9 IA act entitied stan act b

|frayips the expenses of government
and maintaining the public credit
by laying duties on household furni
ltare and gold and silver Watches
r5assed on the 1sth Of Jan. 1915.
r Mr.. jackson, Of Va. moved to q
mend the resolution so as TO make il
read as follows" Resolved. That
IT 10 expedient to continue the act
Having duties on household furniture
and geld and silver Watches; and so
to amend the $, i'd act as to :nsure the
faithful execution thereof, and toI
guard against IFS violation. by specl-
flying the arti,its liable 10 taxation
and The amount 10 &c levied on each!
article. or " requiring a valuationI
Ito be made by the owner ON both."I
To support his proposition Dir.
Jackson entered into concise but
pretty general examination OF the
subject, and enforced the propriety
OF retaining the tax 10y arguments 10
shew that its alleged unproduetive
ness had arisen from evasioDs of the
law, which might easily he prevent
ed in future kie was in favor Of
the continuance of the duty. because
lit was tax upon luxury, vas ofeasy
collection and equitable and the
revenue arising from this source. he
was convinced. would be so ample
as to auihorise the repeal ofanOther
tax much more Objectionable &c.
$ Mr.. Lumpkin followed in support
of the motion, and. in concise
speech, urged the equity and pro
pliety OF continuing The tax.
Mr.. Lowudes opposed the motion.
and again explained The reasons
: which induced the committee OF
8 Ways and Means to recommend the
repeal Of the tax. which recOmmen
dation he defended at some length,
E on its entire unprodue,iyeness 4
vfxatious character. as proved dur
, ing the term it had been 10 opera
! ton.
On AR. Jackson's propositions, Il
; debate took place Of nearly two hours
continuance. in hich seyera! gentle
men participated. Messrs Cond;t.
Southland. Cannon. Wright and Bar
s bour, several'y spoke in favor of the
motion and against the repeal of the
tax !; Il Mess. Taylor IN. i. Mil
nor, CASTOR and Pickering opposed
the amendment and advocated the
repeal. IRE ground occupied in The
debate was not very extensive. few
prominent and obvious arguments.
, with some illustration, comprising
the -pith OF the discussion. Those
who advocated repeal OF the tax.
did go. principally on the ground of
its failing TO produce the anticipated
revenue, its whole product amount
Vino IN ahou, 7s nnn iniiana,~ instead
lof upwards Of u million, which had
been calculated on because Of is
oG;ous character which subjected;
ever, mans house to the intrusioni
of The collector, and TO domieiIiary
visits, Without sufficient ohieut ; be-
caase. after al, il would be eyade,lt
in many eases. aud The otiium of thu
tax he incurred without aisording a
productive revenue, &c. Those op-i
posed TO repeating the tax replied
that all taxes we're more or less
odieus to the people bat this not
particularly so !; that its unproduc-
lliVeness had arisen from cyas;ons &
an uUfaithfai collection Of the duty s.
tha' il was equitable, and if repeatedi
opld exempt certain class Of the i
community almost entirely from con-
ltributing 10 the public support s.
THAT it was q tax onwealth Il lnxuyy;'i
and was necessary TO equalize and
perfect the system Of revenue now in
progress. 6e.
The question on the motion 10 a
mend was taken by yeas and nays,
and decided IN the negative, as fol- (
lows: |,
YEAS-Mcssrs. Alexander, Ba Il
ker. Barbour. Bafeman, Bennett,
Blunt, Brooks. Bryan, Rurweli,
Caldwell. Calhoun, Cannon, Clark. Ia
n. C.. Clark, Ky. Comstock. Condit
~. N. HAL. LII Ii