The Arkansas advocate., 1836-12-30

reflection satisfy every one that to reaniro be people to pay taxes to the government merely that they may be paid back again. is sporting with the
 interest o the country, and system which produces such results be expected to receive the public cen tenanee Nothing could be gained by it, even if each individual who contributed portion of the tax could re- ceve back promptly the portion. But is apHa- rent that system of the kind can ever be enforced which will not absorb considerable portion of the mo- ney to be distributed in salaries and commissions to the agents employed n the process and in the various los ses and deprecatons which arise from other causes and
 the practical effect of such attempt must ever be to bur- den the people with taxes not for purposes beneficial to them but to swell the profits of depose banks and sup port band of useless public officers
 distribution to the people is inpracteable and m just Ill other respects. 1t would be taking one mans property and giving it to another. Such would be the unavoidable result of rule of equity, and other is spoken c would be likely to be adepted inasmuch as there IS no mode by which the amount of the individual contributions o our citizens to the public revenue can be aseertalned We know that they contribute unequattg and rule therefore that would distribute equag would be liable to all the objections which apply to the principle of equal division of property flo make the general government the instrument of carrying this odous prnc pie into effect, would be at destroy tue means of It's usefulness, and change the character designed for by the franlers ot the constitution
 But the more extended and injurious consequences likely to result from policy which would collect sur plus revenue for the purpose of distributing it, may be forcIby illustrated by a exainaton of the effects al ready produced by the present deposite This act although certainly designed to insure the saf keeping of the public revenue, is not entirely free in its tendencies from many of the objections which apply to this principle ot distributions The government had without necess- ty, received from the people large surplus, which, n- stead Of being employed heretofore and returned to them by means of the public expenditure was deposited With suhdry banks The banks proceeded to make loans upon this snfpus and thus converted 1t into banking ptal and in this manner has tended multiply bank eharters and has had great agency in producing spi Tit of Wild speculation. The possession and of the property out of which this surplus created belong to naut hoe ite session to incorporated banks whose interest and effort It IS to make large profits out of it's This process need only be stated to show it's injustice and bad policy
 And the same observations apply to the influence which IS produced by the steps necessary to collect, well as to distribute such About three ifths ot all the duties on imports paid tie city of New York; but It Is obvious that the to pay those duties are drawn from every quarter Oi the 1Un Every citi- in every state who purchases and consumes an ar
 cle which has paid duty that port contributes to the accommodating The surplus collected there must therefore, be made mp of moneys property withdrawn from other points and other states. Thus the wealth and business of every region from which these surplus funds proceed must be to extent injured, while that of the place where tue funds concentrated and are e- poyed III banking, are proportionaby extended. But both m making the transfer of the finds which first necessity to pay the duties and collect tic suasald III making the re-transer, which becomes necessary when the time arrives for tue distribution of that surplus there is considerable period when the funds cannot be brought into use and is manifest tha besides the
 loss inevitable from such operation, it's tendency produce fluctuations in the business ohe country which always productive of specuaton and detrimental to
 the interests of regular trade Argument scarcely be necessary to show that of this character ought not to receive farther legislative encouragement
 By examining the practical operation of the ratio for dlstfDutlon, adopted m the depose bill o1 the last son shall discover other features that appear equally objectionable. Let be assumed, for the sake of argu ment that the surplus moneys te be deposited with the states have been collected, and belong to them in the tlo of thelr federal representative populatonan sumption founded upon the fact that any deficiencies in our future revenue upon mposts and public lands must be made up by direct taxes collected from the states in that ratio. 1t IS proposed distribute the surplus say 30 000090, net according to the ratio in which has been collected and belongs to the people of the states but in that of their votes in the colleges of electors of President and Fce President. The effect of distribution upon that ratio IS shown in the annexed table, marked A.
 By the examination of that table, 1t will be perceived that Tn the distribution of surplus of $50 000,0 900, upon that bass there IS great departure from the prin cple which regards representation as the true measure of taXation and will be found that the tendency of that departure will be to increase whatever inequalities have been supposed attend the operation of federal system Tn respect to its bearings upon the different nte rests of the Union. In making the basis of representa- ton the basis of taxaton the ramers of the constitution intended te equalize the burdens which are necessary support the government and the adoption of that rato while 1t accomplished this object, also the of adjusting other great topics arising of conflicting views respecting the political equality of the various members of the confederacy Whatever therefore dis turbs the liberal spirit of the compromises which estab
 ished rule of taxation just and equitable, and which experience has proved to be well adapted to the ge nius and habits of people, should be received with the greatest caution and dstrust.
 bare inspection, n the annexed table, of the differ enees produced by the ratio used in the depose act, compared with the results of distribution according to the ratio of direct taxation satisfy every unpreu diced mnd that the former ratio contravenes the spirit of the constitution and produces degree of injustice in the operation of the federal government which would be
 fatal to the hope of perpetuatng it. By the ratio of di taxation for examples the State of Delaware in the collection of $3000o,000 of rcvenue would pay into the treasury $1Ss 6 and in distribution of s30 OO0 GOO she would receive back from the government according