Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1830-02-16


WIN ne whole loss sustained. Mr.. g.. said, that az
tue scheme has been commenced by the state tor state
purposes, and state emolument, and had failed, the
consequences OF the failure should be visited on the
stae large aud not on any particular portion OF it,.
lie thought that in every enterprise whoever takes
The proht IL successful, should De ar the loss if uufsr-
tunate.
Mr. C. said he thought ii could no, be good policy
III 'he STATE TO emharrass, with heavy duties, any Of
our domestic produc; the contrary he thought wis
dch prudence aud sound policy required that agrcul
,urh products should DO as much encouraged anl az
niue untrammelied posslbe; for, their necessary
burdens are sufficiently onerous. Mr.. G.. said, he
thought the prospect of The Virginia planters gloomy
IN the extreme: he would repeat the eNpre son glOovu
m the ertreme. Their articles OF cousunpti ton burden.
ed from abroad their products for expiration at hone
and the low prices in the market afforded the m hut
gloomy prospect, indeed-Addsd TO this picture is the
ac that the tobacco Of Kentucky and Missouri in some
markets has entirely suppanted. and in others is sue
ces'Iuy rivallng that OF; Virginia which adds shade
TO ctnre already sufficiently gl00ny
MT u sad, that very lew VINO were not Interested
IN 'he CULTIVATION OF tobacco, knew the OF duties
imposed upon Il, very few knew the fact that the ship.
ping duty which imposed for the purpose OF de-
raging the expenses of inspection, had snce it, impo-
stion paid into the Treasury upwards Of 500, 900
was still; exactei.
Mr.. G. said, that from the report Of the second an
ntor II would be seen that the James river people
paln IN Tolls, on The canal upwards of 81 00O ami be
thought the next year would pay S25 600 This h.,
thought, was very heavy burden. MIR G. said il
was tue, aud h challenged investigation that taking
'heir produce into account, the James river people
were heavier taxed than the people OF any other per.
uon oil the state, and he asked was it lust.
Mr. q. snid that this duty was unequal because il
operated alike on tobacco ofevery quality description
II was paid sometimes hogshead which would not
bring more than two dollars.
Mr. &. said that tbs tariff of tolls imposed nv the
act oil lo2i5 the tolls on the Kanawha river and road
had been, by act OF the last session. if he remem
oered correctly reduced fifty per cent; AMI he asked
why not extend The same indu gence TO the James ri.
yer planters! why were they retained as the victims
Oh ms oppressive AMI unjust duty. imposed in viola
ton oil state pledge TO the exclusion OF others!
Mr IL said, thatit had been urged that other arti-
c'eA OF produce were in the same condition. Mr. c.
saId he would answer such an argument by asking
from what principle il, that one act OF injus-
uce and oppression was justified by another:
MT n' concluded by saying III there no ground
VI Ju'uncauon Tor the Imposition OF this duty, much
less Tor lis continuance and that he appealed TO Ike
Justice, magnimy and good sense OF the House to a.
gree win the committee in their report, in order that
bill might be brought in.
Mr. GARLAND IF amherst said. IL was the wi n NJ
some OF the friends of this report and of the gentle.
man from Nelson, who offered the resolution which
gave Use ne, that the vote which was now about TO
be gwen, should BE- decisive voie-hat il shoulI test
we sense oil the house, as TO the iormaty in
rouucrg bill upon it, unless il was the intention of
the house TO pass that bill when Introduced With this
understanding, he begged the indul gence OF the house
Tor short time whilst he presented 10 il some of those
considerations which he thought went TO sustain the ms
Ice aud propriey OF the report. 1t subject deeply
interesting TO large portion of the country engaged
III 'he culture oil tobacco; AMI representing he did
part oil that country, he felt il i'm some degree in
cumbent upon him, to unite hs efforts with the efforts
oil ohers in endeavOuring 10 unshackle the tobacco
trade and free it from those burthens by which it is
now oppressed.
Under the old james river company the to!l ON tobac
co was lprty-two cents per hogshe ad'hs thought
TO he inll and ar compensation TO that company for
Tue iscinIies shered by H. in navigating that stream,
ana the people paid this toll without complaint for il
was not so high % he oppressive tlem-But what
Is now the case? BY the of 1924 the tolls on to.
bacco were increased fifty eight cents which added
10 the former toll OF fortytwO cents makes the amount
al hs Time 10 one dc ar per hog shead II is of this toll
the people complained, and ne thought they had right
TO complainant what reason was there for this in.
crease OF the tolls? What justifying excuse can he
'ound Tor this oppressivey burthening the products
oil their land and labour! He was aware that rea.
son YVES thought to exist, and gentlemen believed they
found that reason in the fact that large sum of mo-
ney had been expended in improving the navg alton of
that river.
There would be some force in this reason if that
rendtUre OF money had been made at the solicitation
81 The people OF that part of the country t had been
made with single eye 10 their accommodation; for if
such had been The case, then they with some Justice
might have been required TO bear the whole burihen
oil That expense. But such not the facial who
are acquainted with this scheme of internal improve
ment, know that it was not 1t was great state work
it was undertaken state work-te be carried on
blythe of the whole state and for the bene m of
the whole state 1t intended to bo a central nommu-
ncation uniting the eastern 81 western extremes Of the
Commonwealth, by means OF which, it was believed
that portion OF the trade OF Kentucky and Ohio would
ma It's way through the middle OF our state. II was
believed also that the trade of the western counties Of
the State wsuld follow the channel and that the
wealth and resources Of those counties would be more
inlly developed Such were the views then entertain
ed and it was with such views that the scheme was
projected, recommended and finally adopted. its his
'oryis wen known-itis known that after large
PendI'ure OF money the work has stopped far short of
its first design and that no benefit has been produced
corresponding with that heavy expense. The qnes-
uon now is, upon whom shall this loss fall? Shall il
talI upon one particular part OF the Siae and shall
mat part bear the whole bur.hen of that debt, which
was contracted Tor the benefit of the whole State and
at the instance OF the whole Stae!-iIs thought not
III this State undertaking. then the whole State
should bear an equal proportion of its bur'hcns-ypt
such IL not the case for, the heavy toll imposed upon
tobacco throws nearly the whole burthen upon that
part OF the Slate engaged in the cultivation of hat
article.
There is another view of this subject, which he
asked to he allowed to present 10 the notice of the
itouse-At the Session Of 1918, bill was Introduced
into tins House. fer the purpose of commencing and
prosecuting this line of Internal Improvement. He
was informed that the dele cation representing tn, to-
bacco- growing part Of the State voted generally az lns
this BIZ, and il was lest.--They voted against it, not
because they were unwilling that the people of that
part OF The country should bear equal proportion of
the eXpense OF any great State wo k hut because thew
were fearful that large expenditure might induce
The Legislature to impose heavy bulhens upon THAR
trade. AZ the next Session. the Session of 1919 20
similar bill introduced and il was this bill which
received tue sanction Of law, and under il the work
was commenced. The deega alton from that part Of the
State generally, voted for this bill,-hey voted for it
under f[m conviction that the danger of excessive
taxation, which had induced them at the previous