The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1913-03-08

annals of the colonies. This act was
passed by the colony of Massachusetts
| in 1649 and was 'occaSioned by a duty
which Saybrook had imposed on goods
| from Springfield in order to maintain
a fort at the mouth of the Connecti-
| cut river. Boston thought this unjust,
| and tried to get the duty repealed.
Failing in this, an impost was levied on
| all goods from Connecticut. This had
| the desired effect and the next year
the obnoxious duties were removed -
A retaliatory measure enacted by
| Virginia has this apology in its pre-
amble: Virginia vessels are compelled
to enter and pay fees before trading
in Maryland ports. This is unneigh-
borly, but Maryland vessels must do
the same here until her laws are re-
pealed.''
Tax on Servants.
A desire to restrict the immigra ton
of criminals and paupers led to the
passage by the colony of Pennsylvania
IN l122 of an act which provided for
| a duty on imported servants and in
1929 another act was passed prevent
ing the importation of conVicts and
paupers. A duty of pounds was laid
on each convict and pauper imported,
and the importer was required to give
bond for the good behavior of the SER
want. Other colonies followed Penn
sylvania's lead and passed similar laws.
A duty of 1 pound for each negro
imported was imposed by Virginia,
the first quarter of the eighteenth CEN
fury and until it was abolished by the
king in 1923. An ad valorem duty of
8 per cent was the next tax imposed
upon the i'm pOrtatiOn of negroes but
this tax was not to be collected until
they were sold and was to issue from
the purchaser. This rate continued
until 1740, when it was doubled and
the next forty years saw the rate vary
between 10 and 80 per cent, 20 per
cent being the average rate of collec-
ton. South Carolina derived greater
revenue from the importation of
slaves than any other colony, partly
because importations were larger and
partly because rates were higher at
times.
1t must not be assumed that this
article covers the entire tariff Iegisla-
ton of colonial history. An effort has
been made to bring out the more i'm
portant measures of the colonies
which were most active in matters of
this kind. Tonnage duties were COM
mon in all colonies, and particularly
so in those having ports of easiest ac-
cess. These duties were clearly for
revenue.
The acts passed by, the colonies af-
ter the dates hereinbefore set forth
vary considerably. 1t appears that al
most every session of the colonial
councils enacted tariff laws of some
kinds, but there is no indication of
originality in them, it generally ap-
pearing that the measures were pat
termed after the laws already in force
in the European countries. Tariff leg
islation, during the course of the Rev
olution was restricted to a few meas
ures, and the period following the war
is the practical beginning of the Amer
lean tariff. 1t cannot be dis
cerned where the colonial tariffs had
any effect whatever on the subsequent
measures of the American congresses, !
and it is with the latter period in the
subject in hand that these articles will
deal.
Article II. will appear in the State |
Journal soon, and will be entitled 1.-The |
First American Congress and the Tar
iff.'
r w. Fl.