Title: Assumption of the State Debts, [22 April] 1790
From: Madison, James
To:

[22 April 1790]

   The sixth resolution (see headnote to speech of 20 Apr.) was amended and approved on 21 April. The seventh resolution, “that immediate provision ought to be made for the present debt of the United States; and that the faith of government ought to be pledged to make provision, at their next session, for so much of the debts of the respective States, as shall have been subscribed upon any of the terms expressed in the last resolution,” was then considered. Sherman offered an amendment to the resolution which provided for the assumption of a proportion of the state debts with the remainder to be left until a final settlement of state accounts. Southern members and Scott of Pennsylvania spoke against the motion. Wadsworth, Sherman’s Connecticut colleague, declared that if there was no assumption “there will be a general clamor through all the eastern states against the national government.” Sherman quoted several passages from the Constitution which he said favored assumption (N.Y. Daily Gazette, 22, 26, and 27 Apr. 1790).

Mr. Madison. It is not without much reluctance that I trouble the committee with any observations on a subject which has been so long under discussion, and may be thought to be entirely exhausted. I must refer for my apology to the uncommon perseverance with which the advocates for an assumption adhere to their object, notwithstanding the difficulties which oppose it. On the supposition that the measure in question were ever so eligible, if it could be so modified as to be acceptable to the general sense of the government, and of its constituents at large, every member ought I think to be struck with the impropriety of pressing a matter of such peculiar importance and delicacy, by a bare majority.
The proposition now under debate is liable to all the objections to the former one, as well as to the many others that have been stated against it. From the explanation given by the gentleman from Connecticut, it is evident that this proposition may in the result assume the shape of the original one. It may therefore be fairly combated by all those arguments that were brought either against the original proposition, or against the very objectionable manner in which the blanks are proposed to be filled up.
I am not insensible that an assumption of the state debts is under certain aspects, a measure not unworthy of a favorable attention. If it had not at least plausible recommendations, I do not think it could have obtained so respectable a patronage here: I am sure it would not have originated in the quarter which proposed it. But, Sir, it is a question that must be considered and reconsidered in all its various points of view, and the more it has already been investigated, the more objections have multiplied, and the more solid they have appeared. The arguments used in favor of the measure have been supposed weighty, but, Sir, I consider them as unsupported. It has been contended that the state debts are in their nature debts of the United States; that they were only from different offices, and have borne a different denomination, but that in justice they are the debts of the United States, and that the individual creditors can of right claim payment of the same from the general government.
I deny the principle, Sir, and I think it is disproved by the arguments of the gentlemen themselves. If the debts of the particular states be nothing more than the debts of the United States under another denomination, and if we are bound to provide for them precisely as for the debts of the United States, let gentlemen consider whether they are not bound to view them in this light wherever they may be found. If they are debts of the United States in the hands of individual citizens, for the same reason that the other debts in private hands are debts of the United States, must they not be debts of the United States also when in the treasuries of the different states?
Will gentlemen say that what are called the state debts ought to be viewed in that light when in the hands of citizens, and that this quality forsakes them the moment they are received into a state treasury. If they wish to preserve consistency in their reasoning, they must say, either that the debts are dissimilar in the hands of private citizens, or that they are similar in the hands of the states.

The debts of the particular states cannot in any point of view be considered as actual debts of the United States; and the United States are not bound by any past requisition, or any resolutions now existing to assume them, till the accounts are settled and the balances ascertained. We have been told, sir, not only that the assumption of the state debts by the United States is a matter of right on the part of the states, and a matter of obligation on the part of the United States, but likewise that it is equitable; nay, that it is a matter of necessity.
It has been said that the United States are invested with the resources of the particular states, and that therefore they are bound to provide for the debts of those states. I think I may safely rest the issue of this question on a question of fact, Whether the states most urgent in this business are incapacitated from providing for their debts by the establishment of the present constitution? If gentlemen assert that to be the case, I think it is incumbent upon them to prove, either that the resources which they have given up would exceed their quota of the federal requisitions, or that the use of these resources by the general government will throw a disproportioned burthen upon that particular part of the community. Let us consider, sir, what is the ratio in which the states, in their individual capacity, ought to bear the debts of the United States, and what is the ratio in which they will contribute under the taxes that it is proposed to levy. The only evidence by which we can guide ourselves in this enquiry is a statement from the several custom houses. I believe indeed, that such a statement may not be conclusive. I think it is imperfect; at the same time it is the best guide in our reach, and probably it will be sufficient to illustrate the present argument. The state of New-Hampshire, according to this statement, will contribute about one hundredth part of what will be contributed by the whole. Her ratio of contribution according to her representation would be nearly about one twentieth. Here then, in fact, is a saving of four fifths to that state. The state may then take this saving and apply it to the purpose of discharging her domestic debt; she is relieved in that proportion, and therefore in that proportion she is more able to provide for her state debt under the new constitution than under the old one.
The state of Connecticut will contribute about one thirty-eighth; her proper quota would be about one thirteenth. Here then is a saving of two-thirds to the state of Connecticut; and in that proportion is her situation better under the new Constitution than the old. Taking the States eastward of New-York altogether, that the gentlemen say are rendered incapable of bearing the burthen of the state debts, by the adoption of the new constitution; I say, take the whole together, and they will contribute about a sixth only; whereas they would have had to contribute a fourth, if this constitution had not been established, and they had paid their part of the debt of the United States. In my apprehension, then, sir, as the payment of the state debts cannot be claimed as a matter of right, neither can such payment be called for on the principles of equity, or what is most of all urged, necessity. But we are told that policy is also in favor of the measure. A gentleman from Massachusetts has said, that the people of Massachusetts never would submit to a rejection of the measure; that it will create a spirit of opposition to the government; in short, that it will endanger the union itself. I confess that these are consequences that would be dreadful to me, if I could suppose they would really take place, and that evils of greater magnitude would not ensue from an adoption of the measure. It is my opinion, sir, that if the refusal to assume the state debts would produce dangerous consequences to the union from the discontents that it is apprehended will grow out of the measure, much more have we to fear from an assumption, particularly if hazarded by a small majority. Sir, if we could ascertain the opinions of our constituents, individually, I believe we should find four fifths of the citizens of the United States against the assumption; I believe we should find more; I believe I speak within bounds when I say, that those who would be for an assumption would not amount to one-fifth; this is indeed probable conjecture only. But on the other hand, let me ask, what evidence have we that there will be any great disappointment or discontents from a non-assumption? The legislature of the state of New-Hampshire have lately been in session; have they asked for this assumption? No; on the contrary, tho’ they have not instructed their delegates to vote against it, it appears that it was thought of, and that the bulk of the members disapproved of it. The legislature of Massachusetts have been in session; they were apprized that this matter was under consideration, and yet there has been no declaration from them, as far as I know, that can induce us to believe they wish for it; on the contrary, it would appear from the measures they have taken to provide for the payment of their state debt, that they had proceeded on a supposition that an assumption would not take place. With respect to several other states, their legislatures have also been in session, and none of them, except South-Carolina, have made any declaration on the subject. If we are to disregard that species of evidence, and to look back to the expectations of the people, I do not think that there is a single indication that this measure was ever thought of by our constituents. Sir, I may safely say, it was never expected by the generality of them.
It has been said, too, that policy recommends the measure. It has been repeated that if the assumption does not take place, no part of the revenues drawn from the Union at large will return to the distant parts of it. Sir, I thought this argument had been set aside sometime since. The very reverse will happen. The state debts have begun already to travel towards the central parts of the Union, and to such an amount as to make it probable, that if they are provided for by us, nearly the whole will follow. Should this be the case, I believe such disadvantages will ensue as will prove the measure very impolitic. In proportion as the whole money contributed in the way of taxes shall center near the government, or in a particular part of the Union, you increase the evil of discordant interests and local jealousies which is already too much felt. But, perhaps, this is not the worst consequence to be apprehended. I conceive that a very great part of the proper debt of the United States will go into the hands of foreigners, and that we shall be heavily burdened in paying an interest to them which cannot be expected to remain in the country; and in proportion as you increase the debt of the United States you will increase this evil.
I am of opinion also that the measure is not politic, because, if the public debt is a public evil, an assumption of the state debts will enormously increase, and, perhaps, perpetuate it. It is my idea, Sir, that the United States and the several states could discharge a debt of eighty millions with greater ease and in less time than the United States alone could do it. I found my opinion on this consideration, that after the United States shall have resorted to every means of taxation within their power, there will still remain resources from which monies may be raised by the states. Nay, I will go farther, and illustrate the remark by adding, that after a state shall have extended its power of taxation to every object falling under general laws, there would still remain resources from which further taxes might be drawn within subdivisions of it, by the subordinate authorities of the state. But Sir, when we consider, that in some parts of the Union there is an unconquerable aversion to direct taxes, at least, if laid, by the general government; that in other parts an equal aversion to excises prevails; how will the United States, so circumscribed as to the field of taxation, be able to draw forth such resources as are contemplated by the advocates of an assumption?
It has been asserted that it would be politic to assume the state debts, because it would add strength to the national government. There is no man more anxious for the success of the government than I am, and no one who will join more heartily in curing its defects; but I wish these defects to be remedied by additional constitutional powers, if they should be found necessary. This is the only proper, effectual, and permanent remedy.
Several gentlemen, Sir, have gone into another field of argument in favor of this measure. It has been said, that the constitution itself requires the assumption. One of my colleagues has asked a very proper question. If as we have been told, the assumption originated in the convention, why were not words inserted that would have incorporated and made the state debts part of the debts of the United States? Sir, if there was a majority who disapproved of the measure, certainly no argument can be drawn from this source; if there was a majority who approved of it, but thought it inexpedient to make it a part of the constitution, they must have been restrained by a fear that it might produce dissentions and render the success of their plan doubtful. I do recollect that such a measure was proposed, and, if my memory does not deceive me, the very gentleman

   Mr. Sherman.

 who now appeals to the constitution in support of his argument, disrelished the measure at that time, and assigned for a reason, that it would administer relief perhaps exactly in proportion as the states had been deficient in making exertions. It has been also remarked, that the constitution having been established for obtaining perfect justice, it cannot be carried into effect unless full justice is done on this subject, or in other words, unless the state debts are assumed. Sir, if we are to take these words in their full extent, we must not stop merely with securing justice to the creditors of the government, we should also endeavour to secure justice to every private creditor whatever. The gentleman says, that, by the constitution, all debts that existed against the United States at the time of the adoption of the constitution are to be as valid now as they were before its adoption.
What was the situation of the state debts before the adoption of the constitution? Was it understood that they were a part of the debt of the United States, any further than there might be found a balance on a final settlement. Was it ever supposed that they were to be thrown into one common mass, and that the states should be called on collectively to provide for them? What would have been thought of such a proposition? Would it have been considered as consistent with equity? Would it have been tho’t constitutional? I am persuaded if such a proposition had been made in the old Congress it never would have found a second; and for this reason, that the debts of the particular states were never considered as the debts of the United States. In whatever light we view the question, it appears to me that the arguments urged in support of it, are themselves unsupportable.
Much has been said of the situation of particular states in case these debts should not be assumed. Much, indeed, has been said of the distresses and exertions of Massachusetts; but if we are to be governed by enquiries of this sort we must extend them to every part of the Union, and we shall then find that an assumption will give as much dissatisfaction and work as much injustice to a majority of the states as a non-assumption may disappoint the citizens of Massachusetts. I do not wish to go into local enquiries, but the present subject seems in its nature to make them in some degree unavoidable. The conduct of gentlemen on the other side, at least renders the task on this indispensable. What would be the operations of the measure with respect to Virginia? It will not be denied that Virginia sacrificed as much during the war, in one shape or another, and contributed as much to the common defence of the states as any among them, certainly as much as Massachusetts. These are facts that can in time be proved. Since the peace, that state has made great exertions to comply with the requisitions of Congress: I might say, Sir, that she was almost unequalled in her exertions. Her specie payments into the federal treasury since the peace exceed 600,000 dollars, whereas those of Massachusetts are only between 2 and 300,000 dollars. In indents Massachusetts has indeed paid most, but by no means in such proportion as to balance the difference in the specie payments. The exertions of Virginia to discharge the debt she involved herself in by the war, have also been very great; she is not behind any of the states—she is before most of them; there can be no doubt but that she has certainly discharged more of her debts than Massachusetts, and as little doubt in the opinion of the best informed, that whenever a final settlement shall take place that state will be found a creditor to the United States.
If, during the war, she has made as great exertions, and has suffered as much as any of the states; if she has since the peace paid her full proportion of the supplies to the federal treasury, at the same time exerting herself to the utmost to discharge her state debt, and if finally she will probably be found to be in advance to the union, and would therefore if justice could at once be done, be now entitled to a reimbursement—what must be said by the citizens of that State, if instead of a reimbursement, they are called upon to make further advances. Sir, I may add here, that their contributions to the federal treasury, under the proposed system of revenue will exceed the ratio by which they would contribute, by taxes laid in proportion to their representation. I do not wish to extend this investigation any farther than has been already done; but were I to do it, the evidence would be more striking, that the payments from those parts of the union that would receive least benefit from the assumption, would be greater than from those that would receive the immediate benefit of it.
One of my colleagues seems to be of opinion that the measure will be favorable to the interest of Virginia; but he seems to me to have grounded his opinion on the erroneous supposition, that the proposed plan will embrace the whole of the debts as they existed at the close of the war, or that the state of Virginia will contribute less, on the plan of deriving revenue from consumption, than she would if derived according to the constitutional ratio. I believe, on the contrary, that if the assumption should take place as originally proposed, that there would be a claim on Virginia for five millions, whereas if there is no assumption, her citizens will have to provide for about three millions only; and thus, instead of bearing her proper burden, which is about one seventh, she would have to bear a burden in the ratio of one fifth. He seems to think that his own particular district would be benefited by this measure; but if he be right in his other opinion, that that part of the state will consume more than the other parts, he will find, sir, that instead of relieving his constituents, compared with the rest of the state, that he would still more augment their burthens; so that it would come to this at last, that the state would have to pay five millions, instead of three—and that the particular part of the state he represents, instead of paying their proportion of three millions, would have to pay more than their proportion of five. I admit, however, that he is the most proper judge on that subject. But the citizens of Virginia would not only be called upon when already in advance, and to an amount beyond their proper ratio, but in a mode that is peculiarly obnoxious to them—I mean that of excise. Sir, the people of that state are as averse to excises as those of any other state can be to direct taxes, and in my own judgment with far more reason, where the article excised is not by some peculiarity free from the common objections. Excises are unequal with respect to different parts of the union: they are also unequal to various parts of the same state. This mode of collection gives arbitrary powers to the collectors, and exposes our citizens to vexatious searches. It opens a door to frauds and perjuries that tend equally to vitiate the morals of the people, and to defeat the public revenue. Besides, sir, excises are more expensive in the collection than other kind of taxes. The collection of the excise in Great Britain costs 10 per cent. That of her direct taxes is computed at 3 per cent, only. I will not positively say that a similar disproportion in the expence of collecting would be incurred in this country; but in some parts of it I am sure that the expence of excises would be greatest, and on some articles in view, would, if the collection were made at all, exceed the revenue obtained from it.
Sir, there has been an argument of another kind advanced in support of the assumption. Gentlemen have thought it a matter of consequence that not only justice should be done, but that the condition of the people should be equalized; that no invidious comparisons might be made between the inhabitants of one state, and those of another, and that no oppressions or embarrassments should force the people to emigrate from one state to another. It would be a comfortable reflection, if every part of the union could be assimilated in this instance; but, sir, I think we have no authority to sacrifice essential considerations to obtain these advantages. Nor do I know that we should obtain them by assuming the state debts. Supposing that measure to be adopted, let us reflect what would be the situation of the different parts of the Union. I do not, at this moment, consider the question as it respects justice, right, or general policy, but in reference merely to the particular consequence of equalizing the circumstances of the people. Let us take a view, comparatively, of the people of the United States. Massachusetts owes a debt of several millions. The public debt, when you come to analyze it, at least where it is due to citizens and not to foreigners, is a debt from one part of the people to the other. The government is the collector from the pockets of the debtors to pay it into the hands of the creditors. If, sir, the state debts should be assumed, Massachusetts will then get rid of her embarrassments; but what would be the situation of Virginia? Besides her public debt, I believe that her citizens owe, one to another, debts, in amount, equal to the whole public debt of Massachusetts, perhaps I might say to the amount of both the public and private debts of that state. In addition to all this, the people of Virginia are indebted to foreigners to a greater amount than the whole debt of Massachusetts. Sir, I firmly believe that though Virginia is less oppressed with public debt than Massachusetts, yet when we take a view of all the difficulties she labors under, and weigh them against those of Massachusetts, it will be found that Virginia ought to be relieved herself instead of being expected to relieve others.
But, supposing all objections of another nature to be laid aside, I freely confess that after a more minute examination into the subject, I am much inclined to doubt whether the assumption can possibly be carried into execution. Difficulties are continually arising when I survey this question, for which I can find no solution, without departing from every principle by which we ought to be guided. It never yet has been shewn in what manner a remedy could be provided for a partial subscription. Suppose the state creditors were part of them to subscribe and part to refuse. Suppose those of one state subscribe, and those of another should not. Again, Sir, by what method will you discriminate the debts that come under the definition, from those that will be excluded by it? Where will you invest this important discretionary power. I really think that great difficulties will be found before this can be effected. There is another objection too, to which I have never heard a satisfactory answer, although it has been repeatedly urged by a member from Georgia. There are debts existing in some of the states that do not bear interest, that have got into circulation without any title to it, and have been received by the present holders without any other expectation than that in some reasonable time the principal would be paid. Would it, Sir, be proper or necessary to consider these as debts of the Union, bearing interest, or to provide for the immediate funding of them? But there is a case, in my opinion, far more difficult, I mean the paper money issued to redeem the state debts. The state of North-Carolina has taken up its certificates with these paper bills. They are not proposed to be included in the assumption. They are clearly excluded by the present motion, yet they are as much a state debt to be sunk by taxes as certificates, and the taxes may as much interfere with those of other states. Some of the states, Sir, have not only assumed the debts recommended by Congress for making up the depreciation to the army, but they have gone further and have made up the depreciation, where it was not recommended. Other states have not done this. The debts existing in some states I take it for granted comprehend these depreciation notes. Would it not be unjust to call on those states that have not made this provision for their army that other states have done, would it not be hard to call upon those officers and soldiers who have not received this additional compensation, to pay it to those of other states, who have? I would not here be understood to censure the states that made this compensation; I rather commend them for it. It is a proof of their magnanimity and justice that does them honor, but at the same time this does not alter the nature of the objection. In some states, in order to reward the army, they have done it by several aids that do not constitute any part of the state debts. In some of the states there are debts still unliquidated. If you declare that, when liquidated, they shall be assumed, you afford a temptation that has been hitherto cautiously avoided, that of making the states less exact in the settlement of their accounts. I do not find that any gentleman has proposed, on the contrary most of them seem to have rejected, the idea of making provision at this session for fulfilling the engagement in case we enter into an assumption. I think it would be a powerful and unanswerable objection against assuming the state debts at this time, that we do not see or are not prepared to decide on the means of providing for them. There is not a more important and fundamental principle in legislation, than that the ways and means ought always to face the public engagements; that our appropriations should ever go hand in hand with our promises. To say that the United States should be answerable for twenty-five millions of dollars without knowing whether the ways and means can be provided, and without knowing whether those who are to succeed us will think with us on the subject, would be rash and unjustifiable. Sir, in my opinion, it would be hazarding the public faith in a manner contrary to every idea of prudence. It is very true, Sir, that a variety of funds have been proposed, yet they are nothing more than mere suggestions, and tho’ I think they are as good as could be expected in the time, I really believe that some of them, at least, if they can be carried into execution at all, will disappoint the calculations on which they are founded.
I cannot finish my observations on this subject, sir, without adverting to one particular, which I would wish gentlemen to attend to, not so much for our sakes as their own. I would recommend to them no longer to assume a pre-eminence over us in the nationality of their motives; and that they would forbear those frequent assertions, that if the state debts are not provided for, the federal debts shall also go unprovided for; nay, that if the state debts are not assumed, the union will be endangered. Sir, I am persuaded that if the gentlemen knew the motives that govern us, they would blush at such intemperate as well as inconsistent language. I am sure that if they knew the emotions with which it is heard, they would at least see the inutility of it. I hope, sir, that whatever may be the decision on this question of assumption, that patriotism and every other noble and generous motive will lead the minority to acquiesce in measures which will tend to establish public credit by a due provision for the public engagements.


Title: To James Madison from Benjamin Rush, 24 April 1790
From: Rush, Benjamin
To: Madison, James

Philadelphia, 24 April 1790
… [Encloses a pamphlet with the request] that you would not suffer it to go out of your hands without guarding against the possibility of its finding its way into a newspaper.… I shall next week send four or five copies of it to Mr. Jefferson. [Also encloses] Dr. Price’s Sermon preached before the Revolution Society in London.… It suggested to me an idea of your house addressing the national Assembly & King of France upon the present crisis in their Affairs. Such a national Act of Sympathy … may encourage the doubting friends to revolutions in Other Countries to acts of enterprise & patriotism. The United States kindled the flame of liberty in Europe. It is highly proper that they should fan it.… Your motion in honor of the Memory of Dr. Franklin has added to the number & affection of your friends in this city.…


Title: To James Madison from Adam Stephen, 25 April 1790
From: Stephen, Adam
To: Madison, James

Dear sirBerkeley County April 25h 1790
I reced the pleasure of your letter, and am greatly Obliged for your Sentiments on the Assumption of the State Debts. If it could be justly done, it would greatly contribute to the establishment of the Fœderal Government. The N E & S W parts of our Empire are not like to Assimalate, and Should the Devil bring about a dissolution—The N Englanders have such a Coasting Trade that Their imposts and Tonnage into the Southern States would amount to a Large Sum, almost half the Trade of N England is to the S. States.
The Senate have met with great Applause for not taking Notice of the Quakers Memorial, and people find great fault with your House for wasting so much time and Expence, in a frivoulous manner.
It has disturbed the Minds of our people, and lessened their Confidence in Congress.
We had a Report here that the Se[c]retary of the Treasury was killed in a duel, and were all in Mourning.
Inclosd you have the Expostulations of Potowmac. I hope the people of N England will See their Interest so plainly that they will give instructions to their Delegates in favour of Potowmac. But I have a Suspicion that the Restless Massachusettians, are entering into new plans of Government. They have taken upon them to dictate more Amendment. Our Constitution at this Rate is to change Annually. I wish you health and am with great Esteem Dr Sir, your most Obt
Adam Stephen

N B I have inclosd to Mr White the Expostulations directd to the Printers of N England, and would be glad that they had them before they were made public at New York.


Title: Public Credit, [26 April] 1790
From: Madison, James
To:

[26 April 1790]

   FitzSimons moved to discharge the Committee of the Whole from that part of the secretary of the treasury’s report relating to assumption. After this motion passed, the Committee of the Whole completed its consideration of the resolutions. The House then took up the recommitted resolutions as amended. A sharp debate ensued over the first alternative of the sixth resolution, which allowed creditors to receive one-third of their payment in western lands at twenty cents per acre. Speaking in favor of a motion to strike out this alternative, Clymer said it was “entirely romantic to suppose that the Western Territory would remain within the union” (DHFCLinda Grant De Pauw et al., eds., Documentary History of the First Federal Congress of the United States of America (3
        vols. to date; Baltimore, 1972—)., III, 379–80; Gazette of the U.S., 28 Apr. 1790; N.Y. Daily Gazette, 27 Apr. and 3 May 1790).

Mr. Madison rose to reply to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Clymer) and expressed strong disapprobation of the sentiments he had delivered respecting the Western Territory. If gentlemen, said Mr. Madison will indulge themselves in such speculative arguments as to ridicule the possibility of a union between the new states of the Western Territory, and of Georgia, &c. with New-Hampshire, we could have little prospect of harmonizing this country. He hoped, however, that such sentiments as those which had fallen from the gentleman (Mr. Clymer) would have no sort of weight in the house; on the contrary, he expected that every part of the territory of the United States, would receive the benefits of the present government, which should be extended to all.


Title: From James Madison to the Governor of Virginia, 27 April 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Governor of Virginia,Randolph, Beverley

SirN. York April 27. 1790
Information having been received here that some persons acquainted with the appropriation made at the last Session of Congress in favor of the officers & soldiers of the Virginia & N. Carolina lines of the late army, are taking advantage of the claimants who are ignorant of that provision, by purchasing their claims for very inconsiderable proportions of their amount, it became a question whether any remedy could be applied to so flagrant an imposition. Several difficulties arose from the established rules of office, from which the Secretaries of the Treasury and at War did not think they should be justified in departing, and from the uncertainty and inconveniency of obtaining an interposition of Congress. The result has been that redress would be most attainable by the aid of the Executives of the two States, and that the nature of the case authorized an expectation that they would readily afford it. The mode suggested is that fit persons be appointed to procure powers duly authenticated from all such as may have alienated subsequent [to] the act of appropriation, together with evidence concerning the circumstances under which and the persons to whom the alienation shall have been made; and that in virtue of those powers, there may be some fit person at the Seat of Government to make claim on behalf of the Soldiers and exhibit the evidence collected. When the matter shall be thus prepared, if there shall appear indications of fraud or undue advantage, a suit may be instituted against the Officer who will be authorized to pay the Sums due (for which pecuniary aid will not be wanting) and the fraud may in this way be ascertained and redressed. It is supposed that the mere institution of a suit will beget a disposition in those who may have taken the advantage to better their title by additional compensations to the parties injured, and that the appearance of such an investigation may deter from like practices in future. It is thought also that if the same persons should be authorised to obtain powers from those who may not have alienated, it may render the payment of the money more convenient.
Inclosed herewith are copies of the names and claims of the Officers & Soldiers of the Virginia line, which may facilitate the arrangements for obtaining the requisite powers from them. It is said that the persons who are taking advantage of their knowledge of the appropriation, in order to proceed with more certainty, possessed themselves of like copies from some Office here, but we have not been able as yet to trace the fact. I have the honor to be with the highest sentiments of respect and esteem, Your Excellency’s Most Obedient & very humble servant
Js. Madison Jr


Title: To James Madison from the Governor of Virginia, 27 April 1790
From: Governor of Virginia,Randolph, Beverley
To: Madison, James

Sir,Richmond April 27th. 1790.
The act of the present Congress to prevent the exportation of goods not duly inspected, according to the laws of the several States, although it secures the execution of the state inspection laws, will not, I fear, procure to the States every benefit, which might be derived from it. By the Constitution of the United States, the several States are Authorized to lay such duties upon Exports as may be necessary for executing their inspection laws. Great frauds may be committed in the collection of this Revenue unless the Officers of the Customs are used as checks upon the Inspectors.
In this State a tax of six shillings pr. hogshead is laid on all Tobaccos exported. This tax is to be paid by the Exporter to the Inspectors, who are to render annually an Account upon Oath, of all Tobaccos shipped from their respective Warehouses. In order to take away all temptation to purjury and to ensure to the State the full amount of the tax, the inspection laws direct, that the Inspectors shall by every boat or other Craft, loaded with Tobacco, send a list of the Marks, weights, &c. of every hogshead of Tobacco then delivered, which lists every Master of a ship is to lodge with the Naval Officer by whom his ship is cleared. This proceeding will, I suppose, be continued under the Act of Congress, but the check will not be complete unless the Collectors are directed to return the Manifests delivered to them by the Masters of ships, to the Executive or some Officer of the State, in order that they may be compared with the Accounts rendered by the several Inspectors. Permit me to request your assistance in procuring the establishment of such a regulation, either by Congress or the Secretary of the Treasury, if his powers will reach the Object. I am respectfully your obt. Servant
Beverley Randolph


Title: To James Madison from Edmund Randolph, 27 April 1790
From: Randolph, Edmund
To: Madison, James

My dear friendWmsburg April 27. 1790.
I have been looking most anxiously for the second communication, which you promised me, as soon as you should have had an interview with the President. Many times have I endeavoured to break in an easy way to my wife the necessity of my return to N. Y; in order to try her spirits, should I go off. As often has she been thrown into an agitation of real agony. Prepared as I am, I would have entered upon the journey long ago; and were her indisposition of a common kind, or her situation no more than an usual approach to the increase of our family, I should quit her without hesitation. But she is impressed with a belief, that she cannot escape death, and, altho’ tolerably lively now, would sink, I suspect, into despair, were I to leave her. What am I to do? I see no other alternative, than this; that I must surrender the office, if my absence cannot be dispensed with. Yrs. sincerely
E. R.


Title: To James Madison from George Washington, 27 April 1790
From: Washington, George
To: Madison, James

Tuesday, 27th. Apl. 1790
If the weather will permit, & Mr Madison’s health suffer him to go out to day, the Presdt. would be glad if he would give him a call before he goes to the House.


Title: To James Madison from Edward Carrington, 30 April 1790
From: Carrington, Edward
To: Madison, James

My dear Sir,Richmond Apl. 30. 1790
I have this moment come to Town and am favored with yours of the 10th. & 17th. Instant for which I beg you to accept my thanks. I am exceedingly happy in the majority having shifted sides upon the subject of the assumption of the State debts because I am certain that no measure could be carried in Congress more productive of discontent; nor do I think that any could be taken under consideration in which the States are so dissimilarly situated. Much as I wish to see an establishment for the support of public credit, I would rather relinquish it altogether for the present session, than see involved with it so fruitful a source of dissatisfaction, especially as the best supporters of the Government in States that have redeemed considerable portions of their debts, would be compelled to assent to the propriety of the complaint. Could the States be admitted as Creditors in the scheme upon their redeemed securities, the measure would perhaps be satisfactory to a majority of the Community. All the true freinds of the Government would unite in defending it, and might be too weighty for its enemies, who would make it a topic for popular clamour; but the proposition as it has been contended for, could not but add to the Enemies of the Govt. many of its freinds as a discontented party. To say that upon a final adjustment of Accounts all things will be set right is saying nothing that ought to be satis⟨fac⟩tory, because leaving the attainment of general justice to depend on that issue is throwing the hazard on the States alone who have been paying their debts, while, to consider them as Creditors for their redeemed securities can ultimately injure no part of the Union: in case there should be no settlement the paying States will nevertheless receive the benefit of their honest exertions should they be considered as Creditors, and should a settlement take place they can receive no more. But leave them on the footing proposed their receiving justice must depend absolutely upon an adjustment of Accounts—at present, and always hitherto, this adjustment has been held an object equally interesting to all the States: yet the prospect of effecting it is desperate; and I presume that to interest some States in deferring it forever, which would be the case with all the non-paying States under the proposed measure, could have no tendency to better the prospect of a final settlement. As to the permanent Seat of Government I have always, since the fatal vote of 88, expected that it would long hang as a clog upon every important measure, and that it would at last, unless the fixture is too long deferred, be placed at the pleasure of Pensylva.
I am much obliged by your observations upon the establishment of the Marshals office. It at present subjects me to expence without a prospect of a Shillings emolument. And after the sitting of the Court at Charlottesville, duties will be required which I am satisfied cannot be executed for many times the amount of what the Laws of the State authorise the officer to receive.
Your desire to have the Act concerning the Census faithfully executed induces me to inclose you a Copy of my advertisement upon that subject in which you will see my arrangement for appointing assistants. Perhaps I have undertaken more labour in the business than was contemplated when the compensation was fixed, but less would not have given to myself a satisfactory assurance of proper assistants.
I still think that an oath is necessary to the faithful compliance of the people with the requisites of the Census Act. The Assistants may compel every one he calld on to make him a return by means of the penalty, but it is not probable he will be able to discover any concealments of parts of families & there is no doubt but that many evil disposed persons will endeavour to impress upon the minds of the people, ideas that their future taxes will be governed by the members they shall now return. Our Commissioners of Taxes collect the number of tithables by means of an oath, so that, as to Virginia, it will not be a novelty to require one. If it is viewed in a different light in other States, I suppose the alteration will not take place, but I shall have much less confidence in the effect of the Act as it stands, than I should were the alteration made. In order that my assistants may know with certainty whome they are to call on I shall injoin it as one of their duties, to take from the Commissioners Books in the several Counties, copies of the lists of tithables which are now collecting & will be compleat before August. These lists will shew them every family: and I shall further injoin it as a duty that these lists be returned to me with the other proceedings for my better satisfaction of the faithfulness with which they have executed their several Trusts. In order that the measures may be as well patronised as possible I have inclosed copies of my advertisement to the Gentlemen of the different Counties who were in the last assembly requesting the favor of their aid to my assistants in impressing upon the minds of the people the importance of faithful returns, and this I have done without respect to the political sentiments of individuals. With great sincerity & Truth I am dr sir yr. Afft. Freind & H s⟨t.⟩
Ed Carrington


Title: From James Madison to James Madison, Sr., 2 May 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Madison, James, Sr.

Hond. SirN. York May 2d. 1790
I wrote some days ago to my brother Ambrose since which little has taken place worth adding. The inclosed newspapers contain a sketch of what has been done in the House of Reps.
I mentioned to my brother that I thought it better to ship or postpone the sale of Tobo. than to sell at the present price in the Country. I am more & more convinced that this will be prudent. The price has risen considerably in Europe, and from causes that will be more likely to carry it still higher than let it fall lower. As long indeed as grain keeps up which the State of Europe make it probable will be for some time, the culture of that article in America, particularly Virginia will divert labor from others, and from Tobo. among the rest. This alone will prevent a low price, by circumscribing the quantity raised.
The influenza or something like it but less severe has revisited this quarter of the Union. I have had an attack which has kept me at home for several days. I am now pretty well over it, and shall resume my seat in the House tomorrow, or at least shall be able to do it. If no business of consequence should press, perhaps I may indulge myself with two or three holidays for the sake of exercise & recreation. Remind my brother A. to send me a copy of the weather &c. from your diary for the months of Feby. March & April, including the heat & cold noted by the Thermometer. When May is over he can send me that also.
Tell Mr. G. Eve that I have heard of a sett of Gill’s Commentary. The Price of the Old Testament is £8. of the New £9. Pennsylva. Curry. My brother Ambs: last letter gave me great pleasure by acquainting me that my mother’s health was increasing. I hope it continues to do so. From yr. Affect. son
Js. Madison Jr


Title: From James Madison to Edmund Pendleton, 2 May 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Pendleton, Edmund

Dear SirN. Y. May 2. 90
I thank you very sincerely for the readiness with which you have complied with my troublesome request on the subject of the Stamp-Act. I made it on a supposition that you had been present at the proceedings of the Virga. Assembly, which I find was not the case. But, knowing the accuracy & extent of your intelligence on all such interresting occurrences, I consider the particulars with which you have favord me as not the less authentic on that account.
You were right in predicting that the assumption would not be abandoned as long as new shapes could be devised for the measure. I understand that the leading advocates persist in declarations of their hopes of final success, and that new experiments are in agitation. Since my last a vote has passed by a large majority separating that part of the Secretary’s plan, from the provision for the federal debt, and bills have been ordered in for the latter alone. This will embarrass the efforts in favor of the Assumption, but will not defeat it, if by any means a majority can be made up on that side.

Something like the Influenza is revisiting this part of America. It seems to be less severe than it was last fall, though nearly as general. I have been confined for some days with that & the effects of the medicine I took for it, but am at present pretty well again. I hope this will find your health undisturbed by that or any other cause, being with fervent wishes of every species of happiness to you, Your affecte friend & servt.
Js. Madison Jr


Title: To James Madison from George Nicholas, 3 May 1790
From: Nicholas, George
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir,May 3d. 1790.
Your favor of the 27th. of Feby. is now before me.
The last act of the Virginia assembly on the subject of a seperation seems to have given general satisfaction. The opposition to that measure still continues but as far as I can hear the bulk of the people are in favor of it.
Spain takes great pains to seduce our people to remove to their country. I have myself seen letters from the Governor of New-Orleans to certain characters who had talkd of going down the river stating the advantages that would result to them from such a step.
The depredations of the Indians have been of a more striking nature this spring than formerly, but not to a greater amount. They have taken several boats, attacked a few of the troops and stolen the Officers horses. These last have opened their eyes which have remained so long shut they no longer consider them as brethren and declare them the aggressors. Their conduct has been the same for ten years, and the only change that has taken place is in their attacking the property and persons of these men who I suppose are the servants of government and not the objects they wished to protect. If these Gentn. now change their language to government it will prove very sufficiently that what I suggested in my former letter was true: that they disregarded the interests of Kentucky entirely and only thought of that of the other side of the river.
Those persons who are best acquainted with Indian affairs say nothing will be effectual unless a war is carried into their country. If such a measure should receive the sanction of government the troops that can be spared from those now in the Western country with the militia will be sufficient to carry it into execution. But if this arrangement should be made the command of the expedition shd. be given to some person in the district. Genl. Scott, Col: Logan or Col: Shelby appear to be the characters best suited to conduct it: if I was to make a choice it would fall on the last Gentn. Mr. Brown is better acquainted with them than I am. The people would go with pleasure and we could furnish every thing necessary but the military stores and wait until it was convenient for Government to pay us.
You are now engaged in the most important deliberations. I do not like the assumption of the state debts. It is too much like consolidation and every thing that was denied by the freinds to the new government, when it was under consideration.
Discrimination is a tender subject; upon the best view I can have of it I should have voted against it.
The funding system is dangerous. I think the people should always be called on to make payment as far [as] their abilities extend; this system was introduced into England when the government doubted it’s own strength and popularity: I hope that is not the case here. A government that relies for support on it’s creditors and not on the affections of the people cannot be durable. And yet I find this one of the arguments relied on in favor of this system.
A happy selection of characters appears to have been made to fill the public offices. The Western country consider their interests as safe in the hands of Mr. Jefferson.
I wish success to all the attempts that have been made in favor of liberty. It will be a greater honor to this age to have it hereafter said that it best understood and asserted the rights of man, than to have to have repeated of them ten times as much as ever was said of the age of Lewis 14th. or Augustus. With very great esteem and regard I am Dr. Sir, Yr. obdt. servt.
G: Nicholas


Title: From James Madison to Benjamin Rush, 3 May 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Rush, Benjamin

Letter not found. 3 May 1790. Offered for sale in the Parke-Bernet Catalogue No. 468, May 1943.


Title: To James Madison from Tench Coxe, 4 May 1790
From: Coxe, Tench
To: Madison, James

Dear SirPhilada. May 4th. 1790
As I know you lodge at Mrs. Ellsworths I take the liberty of troubling you wth. a request that you will oblige me so far as to engage a chamber for me in her house. And if possible one exposed to the South tho it should be in the upper story. I expect to leave Philadelphia for my fathers seat to Morrow, and shall return my sulkey from thence and proceed in the Stage so as to reach New York on Saturday.
I have received a letter this day from the Secy. of the Treasury, and will mention to you that this journey is to take the Situation of his Assistant. But as the matter had best come to the world from him you will be pleased to consider this information as confidential. I have the honor to be with the most respectful affection and esteem, dear Sir yr. mo. obedt. hum. Servt.
Tench Coxe
My family will not be with me at this time.


Title: To James Madison from Benjamin Rush, 4 May 1790
From: Rush, Benjamin
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir,Philada May 4th 1790.
Your proposition for doing justice to the late Army of the United States becomes both popular & practicable in proportion as it is contemplated. Many people are Converts to it, who at first considered it as impracticable & impolitic. Among these I have reason to believe is A Gentleman from South Carolina who bore a decided part in the Opposition to you on the floor of Congress. He is a Correspondent of our mutual friend’s Mr Coxe.
The principal design of this letter is to request that Mr Coxe may not be made acquainted with my Opinions respecting the funding System, nor even with our having exchanged letters upon the Subject. He is devoted to the Secretary’s principles and plans—and I have harmonized with him upon so many subjects than I did not wish to hazard an interruption of our friendship by letting him know how heartily I reprobated the whole of the Secretary’s report. With great respect I am Dr Sir yours sincerely
Benjn Rush


Title: From James Madison to Edmund Randolph, 6 May 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Randolph, Edmund

My dear friendN. Y. May 6. 1790.
Your’s of Apl. 27. is this instant put into my hand. I have written to you all the letters that were promised, and have forborne to write others, because the cessation of yours led me to conclude that you had set out for N. Y. I am extremely sorry to find that this was not the case, but cheifly, on acct. of the cause of your delay. I can not suppose that under your circumstances any criticism can be made on your absence from this place, or that you are under the least necessity of deciding on the alternative which you state.
The State debts are at present in a state of severance from the federal. Further efforts will probably be made to reunite them, but present appearances do not threaten success. The federal debts will be provided for pretty much as proposed by the Secy.
Mr. Jefferson has been laid up near a week with his periodical head-Ach which has been very severe. I have been confined nearly as long with an attack of the same kind with that at George Town though in a less degree, and with the influenza which is again visiting this quarter pretty generally. Yrs. affely
Js. Madison Jr


Title: To James Madison from William Davies, 8 May 1790
From: Davies, William
To: Madison, James

Editorial Note
As the Virginia commissioner charged with settling the state’s accounts with the Union, William Davies had been in New York since early 1789 arranging and presenting vouchers and other evidence of the Virginia expenditures during the war. In conducting this business the commissioner worked closely with the Virginia delegation in Congress, particularly with JM, who was “zealous on this subject” (PJMWilliam T. Hutchinson et al., eds., The
          Papers of James Madison (vols. 1–10, Chicago, 1962–77; vols. 11—, Charlottesville,
        Va., 1977—)., XII, 11–12 and  n. 1; CVSPWilliam P. Palmer et al., eds., Calendar of
          Virginia State Papers and Other Manuscripts (11 vols.; Richmond, 1875–93)., IV, 596–97, 607, 622–23; V, 39–40, 52, 56–57, 63, 71–72, 85, 90–91, 101–2, 105–6, 115, 125–26). Throughout the protracted debate over the assumption of state debts, JM had indeed been the zealous guardian of the commonwealth’s interests. To be palatable to Virginia and other states that had already discharged a large portion of their wartime debts, assumption, JM insisted, would have to be subordinate to the ultimate settlement of accounts. His overriding concern was that an immediate assumption would impede or perhaps prevent a final adjustment. If assumption ever took place, JM did not want Virginia to depend on such a settlement to obtain its full measure of justice (see speeches of 24 and 26 Feb., 1 Mar., and 22 Apr. 1790).
As if to confirm JM’s apprehensions, the board of commissioners on 30 April submitted to the House a preliminary report on the various state claims that was pointedly offensive to Virginia. The accounts on which the state’s claims were founded were vague, irregular, and disorderly, the commissioners wrote, thus leaving the House members to draw the inference that the claims probably exceeded the commonwealth’s actual expenditures. The authors of this report were John Taylor Gilman of New Hampshire and John Kean of South Carolina; the third commissioner, William Irvine of Pennsylvania, was absent. “North Carolina and Georgia are also stigmatized,” Davies wrote to Governor Randolph on 21 May, “but their Vengeance seems more particularly directed at Virginia. How far their own Speculations may have influenced their conduct, cannot be ascertained, but their Zeal for the Assumption is well known. The House were so little pleased with the Report, that they would not suffer it to be read and on the request of Mr. FitzSimmons with the general assent of the members, the printers and short hand writers were desired not to publish it” (Beverley Randolph to Washington, 4 Aug. 1790, with enclosures [DNA: RG 59, State Department, Miscellaneous Letters]).
Davies’s reply to this report is printed below. At the request of the state’s representatives, the Virginia commissioner also drew up a statement of Virginia’s claims with explanatory remarks. These documents, together with an extract from the 30 April report, were transmitted by Davies to Governor Randolph on 21 May (calendared in CVSPWilliam P. Palmer et al., eds., Calendar of
          Virginia State Papers and Other Manuscripts (11 vols.; Richmond, 1875–93)., V, 156–57). The governor in turn forwarded copies of Davies’s letter and its enclosures to President Washington in August just as a bill for settling the state accounts was being enacted into law (Randolph to Washington, 4 Aug. 1790 [DNA: State Department]; Randolph to JM, 4 June and 10 Aug. 1790). While this bill was under consideration during the summer of 1790, JM, who had denounced the commissioners’ report as “a libel on the State” (Davies to Randolph, 21 May 1790), sought to dilute the influence of the board of commissioners. He supported an amendment that would have transferred much of the business to the Treasury Department and in effect added the secretaries of state and treasury to the board (N.Y. Daily Gazette, 2 June 1790; Gazette of the U.S., 7 July 1790). Although this amendment was not adopted, the bill passed by the House on 22 June provided for two additional commissioners (N.Y. Daily Gazette, 23 June 1790). The Senate struck out this provision, however, and also rebuffed JM’s attempt to reinstate the additional commissioners in a separate bill (DHFCLinda Grant De Pauw et al., eds., Documentary History of the First Federal Congress of the United States of America (3
        vols. to date; Baltimore, 1972—)., III, 469, 510, 511, 513, 522–23, 548, 550, 556–57; U.S. Statutes at LargeThe Public Statutes at Large of the United
          States of America … (17 vols.; Boston, 1848–73)., I, 178–79).
The attempt to enlarge the board not only failed, but on 9 August Gilman and Kean (along with Irvine) were reappointed commissioners (DHFCLinda Grant De Pauw et al., eds., Documentary History of the First Federal Congress of the United States of America (3
        vols. to date; Baltimore, 1972—)., II, 92, 93). This happened after Randolph had sent Davies’s letter and papers to the president for the express purpose of preventing their reappointment. Washington, however, could see no just cause for removing them after having inquired into their official conduct. He assured the governor that the unfavorable reaction to the commissioners’ report would induce such caution on their part in the future that Virginia would “have no cause to apprehend a premature or uncandid decision” upon its accounts. This forecast proved accurate, as from this time until the accounts were finally settled in 1793 the state’s claims were accepted with great liberality (Washington to Beverley Randolph, 24 Aug. 1790, Fitzpatrick, Writings of WashingtonJohn C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of
          George Washington, from the Original Sources, 1745–1799 (39 vols.; Washington,
        1931–44)., XXXI, 94–95; Ferguson, Power of the Purse, pp. 323–24).

New York May 8th. 1790.
The Commissioner for settling the Continental Account of the State of Virginia having seen the report of the two Commissioners of the General Board to the House of Representatives begs leave to remark to the Senators and Representatives of Virginia,
That although it is not very evident how far the information called for by the House, rendered it necessary for the two Commisssioners to go into a discussion of the Conduct of the State Commissioner, yet Candor would seem to have required that they should so far have possessed themselves of facts, as not to ascribe to him transactions with which h⟨e⟩ was wholly unconnected, being in no measure concerne⟨d⟩ with the public Accounts till the period for presenting claims had expired; nor having ever had any communication with the District Commissioner, till within One Month prior to his leaving the State with the Papers. It is true that with an intention of defining more precisely the Claims of Virginia, the State Commissioner after his Arrival here did propose a recurrence to certain books and papers for that purpose: But when he found that the period limited by the general Board was too short for the object, that some of the public officers were unwilling to part with documents which had been officially committed to their Charge, and that no general principle of ascertaining the depreciation had been adopted, so as to have universal Operation through all the branches of the Account, it became obvious that the measure was not only impracticable for want of time, but unnecessary, as little more certainty could be hoped for as to the Amount of the just Claims of Virginia than already appeared in the general Statements which had been presented, which were formed on principles of as much Accuracy as the Occasion would admit, or as could have been expected after so extensive a destruction as that of near five years Vouchers. The Commissioner of Virginia, therefore resumed the employment in which he had been engaged, of collecting evidence to supply the loss of Vouchers, and of completing the Statements from the books and papers which had been left by the district Commissioner. These Statements have since been regularly delivered, partly to the Auditor of the Treasury, and partly to the General Board; tho’ from the Expression of the two Commissioners, “that no other or further Specification was made,” it should seem that this Circumstance was wholly unknown to them: And, indeed, from the terms in which they speak of the books opened by the late district Commissioner, it would appear that they were not acquainted with the existence of two other books delivered at their office, in which the whole of the Advances from the Treasury from the 13th. of September 1775 to the 4th. of January 1781 are distinctly Stated and have actually undergone the examination of former Commissioners from Congress.
The Remarks made by the two Commissioners on the Vouchers they have Specified, are so wholly incongruous to the modes and principles by which the state of Virginia settled with her Citizens, that it is difficult to affix to them any definite meaning that can apply to the Subject. It may be sufficient therefore to give some explanation of the Nature of these Vouchers. No. 396 was granted under a law which entitled the Citizen furnishing the Article to be paid in Six Months after date with interest and depreciation. This depreciation had no referrence to the scale, as the two Commissioners seems to suppose, for that was not formed till more than 12 Months afterwards, but was ascertained at the Commencement of every quarter by the grand jury of the General Court, making the price of Tobacco the Standard. No. 431 & 437 were given under laws which allowed no depreciation, but entitled the holder to prompt payment at the Treasury, or Authorized him to pay the Voucher to the Collector in discharge of an equal Amount of his tax at the rates fixed in the laws: And as there is nothing in either of these Vouchers which respects or in any degree militates with the Scale of depreciation, it is difficult to discover for what purpose they are introduced. No. 680, 685, 741 & 745 are all of them for horses impressed under special restrictions, and the depreciation on the specie Value ascertained from time to time by temporary regulations similar to what has been before mentioned. Every one of these Vouchers as well as those which have been before specified were given to the Citizens and settled by the state, some time before any scale of depreciation was established and while no other payments but paper were made at the Treasury. This circumstance will account at Once to the two Commissioners why the scale could not govern in the settlement with the Individuals as well as why specie Certificates were turned into Continental Money, “the necessity of which” to them it seems, “was not apparent.” After all it is humbly conceived that the principles and modes by which the State adjusted the Claims of her Citizens are not in ordinary Cases so properly the Objects for the enquiries of the General Board, as the proofs, that these Claims were actually adjusted and assumed.
[“]That it will be necessary to consider from whence, the amount charged arises, and the rate by which depreciated paper has been reduced to specie, as it will Materially affect the real specie Value of the claims” are truths not likely to be denied; and if the introduction of Voucher No. 445 was only to shew the powers of Calculation and to prove that an Article charged at a depreciation of 40 for 1 is rated fifteen times as high as at 600 for 1, it is probable the House will not think the information either new or very important. If however it is meant to insinuate that exorbitant prices were allowed to the Citizens, the Original letters, ready to be produced from the Commanding Generals of the Southern troops complaining of the restrictions imposed by the Government of Virginia on this head will evince the Caution and even parsimony of the State: And if we consider that the temporary rates of depreciation by which these claims were adjusted, were almost always fixed some time before the settlements were made, it will be evident that the payments to the Citizens and of consequence the charges against the Union, must in like manner in all these cases be invariably below the Appraised Value of the Articles furnished. But if it is meant that the claims are vague and indifinite for want of reduction by some Scale, it may be sufficient to reply that they are stated as they were actually settled with the individuals, neither Claiming 40 for 1 when the State settled at less, nor relinquishing the claim if it should be allowed to others.
Upon the whole if the two Commissioners in framing their report, had it in contemplation to criminate the Conduct of the Commissioner of Virginia, it may be doubted whether the Occasion was proper, or the object pertinent to the Views of the House: Or if their design was to discredit the Accounts of Virginia, the Vouchers do not appear to be well chosen for the purpose, nor duly understood by them, neither is it improbable that at least an equal number of doubtful Charges might have been selected with equal ease from the Accounts of any other state. More enquiry would have afforded the two Commissioners better information, and would probably have induced them to have avoided “a discussion,” which they profess to have been “highly disagreeable to them,” and which the concurrent sense of the House has pronounced to be unfit for the public eye.
Wm. Davies.


Title: From James Madison to the Governor of Virginia, 11 May 1790
From: Madison, James
To: Governor of Virginia,Randolph, Beverley

SirN. York May 11. 1790
On the recipt of your letter on the subject of the Inspection law of Virginia, I communicated the matter to the Secretary of the Treasury. He sees no impropriety in his giving the requisite instruction to the Custom-House officers and having promised to do so, I shall decline an application to Congress.
Since the late separation of the State debts from the national, the House of Reps. has been cheifly employed on objects of the inferior kind. Bills are now brought in for the intended provision for Public Credit. They correspond in substance with the plan of the Secretary so far as it relates to the National part of the debts. If the assumption of the State debts should not be revived as we apprehend may be done, it is probable that a little time will now close the deliberations of the House of Reps. on the subject which has so long occupied them.
I inclose the papers of this morning and have the Honor to be with the highest respect & esteem, Sir, your most hble st.
Js. Madison Jr


Title: To James Madison from the Reverend James Madison, 12 May 1790
From: Madison, James (Reverend)
To: Madison, James

My dear FriendMay 12. 1790 Williamsburg.
I recd. your Favr. by Mr Randolph and shd. sooner have written to you, but that I waited for his Departure. I wished to congratulate you on a Motion made by yourself some Time past, which tho’ unsuccessful, in my opinion, does equal Credit to the Head & to the Heart: and I beleive, there are very few indeed, unconnected with the Business of Certificates, who think otherwise. The Disappointments of the best Politicians are not perhaps less frequent than those of other Men; but they must console themselves with having erected Lights, which tho’ the unwary Mariner may not avail himself of at present, will, most probably be of future Utility.
I have taken the Liberty to inclose two Letters. Some of the Members in Congress will probably forward that to Dr. Seabury. A late Convention of our Church thought proper to elect me to the Episcopal Office, & I have consented, whether wisely or not, I cannot say, to undertake it; so that it is most likely, I shall have the Pleasure of seeing you in New york, this Summer.
You will see, I think, in Stuart’s Pol. Œconomy the very same Idea, wch. Mr Blair supported, respecting an ideal & immutable Standard of Value—tho’ he had not seen the Book, untill he had written his Paper, when I put it into his Hands.
Mr R. is very uneasy at his long Delay here, the Situation of Mrs. R. however is such, that he cannot resolve to leave her, tho’ he sometimes talks of setting out very soon.
I beg to be remembered by our ⟨valuable?⟩ Friend Mr Jefferson & that You will beleive me to be Yr. sincerely affe.
J Madison


Title: To James Madison from James Mercer, 12 May 1790
From: Mercer, James
To: Madison, James

Dear Sir—Virginia. Fredericksbg. May 12th. 1790.
Your favour to Mr. Page, of the 27th Ulto. came to that Gentlemans hands as early as might be—but a Negociation being then on Hand between the Trustees of the Fredericksbg Academy and a Gentleman of Massachusets, who had undertaken to fill the vacant Professorship in our Academy on certain terms we cou’d not decide as to the Gent: mentioned by your Friend Doctor Johnston untill we shou’d hear from Massachusets and Mr. Page being obliged abroad before we cou’d hear from the Gentleman of Massachusets your favour was left with me to answer according as the event shou’d render necessary.
The last Post brought the acceptance of our Terms from the Gentleman of Massachusets, with advice that he shou’d set out immediately for the Academy. This Sir obliges the Trustees to consider the vacancy filled, but as many things fall between the Lip & the Cup we shall be happy to hold this second chance, in Case of accident & in Case it can be done without any disappointmt. to the Gentleman mentioned by Doctor Johnston—of which we shall beg leave to advise you on the arrival of, or a disappointment in the Gentleman at present engaged.
I am authorized by the Trustees to present to you Sir their thanks for your attention to this business—in which I most cordially join as an Individual.
As I know it will give you pleasure to hear of the progress of our Infant Seminary, I do myself the honour of assuring you that we have the most sanguine hopes of our academy’s rewarding by it’s success the Zeal & Labour of its patrons, we have suffered a Loss of the Scholars in the Mathematical & English School for want of a Professor but we have had a very considerable increase in the gramar School & doubt not but that we shall very shortly reestablish the other Schools—And shou’d We succeed in obtaining the Funds we are now endeavouring at, I am confident the Fredericksbg Academy will have more Scholars than has ever yet been in any Seminary in Virga.
Give me leave to add my sincere wishes for your felicity as an individual & as much happiness as a statesment [sic] as Congress will admit of—and be assurd I am with real esteem Yr. respectfull & very huble Servant
Js. Mercer


Title: Notes on Navigation and Trade, [ca. 13 May] 1790
From: Madison, James
To:

[ca. 13 May 1790]
Molasses
Massts. has 60 distilleries. (Sheffd. p. 108)

In 1769.—3,580,144. galls. of French & Surinam,—and only 299,678 of British Molasses were imported into N. America—(Id. 109)

The Quantity of foreign Molasses imported into America, prior to the war, appears by the Custom house books to be greater than the quantity of rum imported there, altho’ the latter free from duty and molasses subject to a duty of more than 20 PerCt. on prime cost—and ⅓ may be reasonably added to the Custom house account. The undistilled consumption inconsiderable (Id. 111.)

⅓ more rum distilled than imported (p. 114)

ton
Cwt
qrs
lb

ton
Cwt
qrs
lb

In 1773. imported into Engd.
61.
6.
2.
20.
— Exported
7 —
6 —
3 —
24

Rum
N. England Rum preferred by the Canadians & lower ranks—is stronger & 25 Per Ct. cheaper (p. 110)

Rum greatly exceeds any other article of W. Indies brought into America. (p. 111.[)]

Rum from Sta. Cruz 3d or 4d. a Gallon cheaper than British—

In 1769. 2,834,752. Gallns. valued at ⅔ Ster: £318,909–12. imported into America (112)

In 1769. rum exported from America—to
G. Britain
25,974

Ireland
2,020

South of Europe
13,871

Africa
322,683

W. Indies
 12,027

376,575. Gallns.

In 1773. total rum
imported into G. B.
2,138,681.
}
No. II

exported from do
828,803.

N. Engld. Rum from 25 to 30 PerCt. cheaper than W. Inds. rum—(Sheffd.)
Rum imported into U. S—1785–86–87—cost 12,000,000 drs—Country rum ½ as much more. Morse 89

Navigation

topsail

sloops

tonnage

No. of Vessels inward to America in 1770
2142
+
4919
=
7061
–
365,110.

do
outward to do
do
2271
+
5135
=
7406
–
385,446

N. B. deduct 60 or 70,000 tonnage for N.foundland—Canada, Nov. Scot: Floridas &c—
In 1774. total British comercial Tonnage 1,136,162
allowing 12 men to 200 tons—sailors, 68,228.

an: 1581
 in 1660

in 1700
 in 1750.
 in 1774

English tonnage
 72,450—95,266
—after navigation act in 15 years—up at 190,533.—
273,693—609,798—798,864

+ ⅓ unregistred 266,288 = 1,065,152 + Scotch 71,010 = 1,136,162 (Id. p. 136)

proportion of foreign to British tonnage cleared out, about 1600—¼—1700. less than ⅙—1725. 1/19—1750. 1/12—1774 less than 1/12. (Ibid)

Ships built
and equipped in N. Engd. Sts
from £7.10
to £8. Sterlg.
per ton

do
middle & S. Sts,
from £8–
to £8–10.
Cost of timber & building
£4.
Most esteemed

do.
live oak, S. Sts
from £10.
to £10.10.
Cost of do
£5.

Medium price in Thames for vessel of 300 tons compleatly finished £9. per ton with £150. for masts & yds.

Wages of Seamen in America 45/. Sterlg. per month—in Engd. 25/. to 30/.

U. Provs. of Holld. have 10,000 national seamen only—with abt. 25,000 from Germany & North of Europe.

total

No. of coasting vessels entered at Custom-House of Philada. in 1785–was 567 all others 501 =
1068.

Exports of U. S. estimated by Mr. Jefferson at £3,000,000—of which ⅓ might be advantageously interchanged with France under regulations mutually liberal & proper

formerly 6,000 seamen in Whale fishing—now free in France—

Rice gaining ground in France—probably whole of American rice may be consumed there—it employed 2500 sailors—

About 600 vessels enter & clear in ports of R. Island annually—Morse

Annual amt. of Cod & other fish exported from N. England, including profits of Whalefishing about £500,000. Morse

Connecticut prior
to 1774. exports £200,000 lawful money. Morse

in 1774. 180 vessels—10,317 tons—1162 seamen besides coasters—with 90 seamen

N York in 1774. 1075 vessels in her trade–40,812

Vessl
Vessls

Pennsylva. vessels entered
1786–910–
1787–870

Exports of Va. rated by Mr. Jefferson at 2,800,000 Dollrs.

do. of S. C. at £505,279. by Morse—

Pennsylva. tonage for 1788—
British
21,240
}
American
214
Ves.
22122

French
1428
New
13
do
1707

Dutch
1411
Coasters
376

20,260

Spanish
3186

603

44 089

Portuguese
  3747

240

28,012

28,012
of 240 Vessels

843

72,101
tons

Penna. Imports

England
411,889
Scotland
4,555
Ireland
  93,504

509,948
W. Indies
134,506
America
   3,368

647,822
Russia
10,060
Germany
10,060
Holland
79,509
Dutch W. Inds.
49,585
France
29,390
Fr: W. Inds.
20,538
Portugal
26,175
Fayal
11,507
Madeira
39,900
Teneriffe
14,667
Spain
38,235
&
7,366
Danish W. Inds.
96,849
Canton
  37,710

1,119,383.
1785 Value of imports—1,018,578

  Imports for 1 Year—

  ending

  Coffee
  967,680
  lb.)
  1788

  Supr. Green tea
  10,000

  Inferr. do.
  136,544

  other teas
  260,000

  Sugar
  5,624,000

  refined
  4,000

  Spirits
  840,000
  Galls.

  Molasses
  543,900

  Mada
  68,000

  Wines
  298,000

  Salt
  400,000
  Busls.

  Non-enumerated—£684,371.

Imports in 1785
W. I Rum
760,000

Gal: @
 3/4
£ 121,829
Contl. do.
326,896

 2/6
40,862
Brandy
51,175

 3/4
8,529
Ginn
11,956

 5/.
2,889
Mada. Wine
27,621

10/.
13,810
other Wine
282,850

47,645
Sugar
645,716

45/.
145,284
Coffee
855,680

15d.
53,480
Molasses
432,000

gs.
22½d
40,500
Bohea tea
150,000

@
 2/6
18,750
other do.
75,000

 6/8
25,000
Non-enumerated

   500,000

£ 1,018578


Title: Notes for Speech in Congress, [ca. 13 May] 1790
From: Madison, James
To:

[ca. 13 May 1790]

2. Present deficiency of Shipping & Seamen
1. Reasons for increasing them
3. Means of so doing
4. Objections answered

Genl Observations—
The progress of modern maxims tends to make Govt. & commerce free among all nations, which will reduce all nations to their natural advantages only. This, ours make desireable to us. If however monopolizing struggles shd. continue with a view to naval strength—No Nation can be so well off as U. S. because they possess bulky produce capable of employing mo⟨re⟩ tonnage and more sure of market, than that of any other Nation whatever.

The British W. Inds. now permitted to send Sugars South of Cape Finisterre—but the high price in those Islands amounts to prohibition. Champ. p. 204. So that the American Market is as necessary for her sugars at an adequate price as for their rum.

The proportion of American vessels in the direct trade with France shews the importance of fostering it—& the do. of British Vessels in the same trade shews how much it concerns both F. & U. S. that F. as well as U. S. should reciprocate the navigation Act of G. B.
Present proportion of Shipping and seamen
At commencement of war 398,000. tons of shipping, built in the U. S. employed in the Genl. Commerce of G. B. Champion. pref: p. x. & p. 33
At do. 400,000 tons of Shipping employed in carrying produce

  of U. S:
  to Europe—

  1,220
  Ships —
  195,000
  tons

  to W. Indies
  }
  2,150

  146,000

  & Coastwise

  In Fisheries

  1,099

   59,775

  4,469

  400,775.
   Champ. 36

Note.Vessels in Europe are generally, property of British Merchts. and navigated by Brit: seamen. Those in the W. Ind. Fish: & coastg trades, almost wholly property of American Merchts. & navigated by american seamen.Ibid.
Note.value of exports of U. S. before the war £3,679,000 Stlg.Champ. p. 73.
Note.total of Shipping in British trade owned by all British subjects in 1775—1,300,000 tons excluding vessels in Fishs. of U. S. coasters of do. & traders from do. to W. I. Champ. 186

NoteNote the proportion of American built Ships to British built do at commencemt. of war, as 23 to 40 and of foreign built to British do. as 12 to 40

NoteNote of the Ships built in America, New Engd. supplied only about ⅗— Chap. 191.
Note.before war— ⅔ of exports from U. S. to W. I. paid for in produce of latter—⅓rd by way of bills of exchange. p. 197

Reasons for increasing them
1. Securing means of defence
2. Precaution agst. the effect of war in diverting foreign bottoms employed in our trade
3. Profit during wars from carrying for other Nations.
4. Indignity of W. I. regulations.
5. Inequality of circuitous navigation between the laws of G. B. & those of the U. S.

1. maritime resources essential in case of attacks—& most likely to prevent them
(a) Seamen a sort of select militia, educated for our defence
(b) a kind of defence having the advantage of a standing force—without its danger to liberty—& they are productive at the very time of their traing &
(c) remark that encouragement of navigation like that of manufactures, attracts foreigners & therefore does not in full proportion divert hands from other occupations
2. G. B. had about ¾ of European Trade which is ⅔ of the whole trade of U. S. & the whole W. Inds Trade which is 1/7 of whole. = ⅚ of whole European & W. I.
G. B has been at War within the period of the last 100 years—40 years = ⅖ of the time.

  During War—the
  increase
  of freight is—

  do.
  of insurance—

Means of increasing our navigations
1. bounties—these inadmissible
2. increase of tonnage on all foreign bottoms This inadequate
3. seek a treaty on liberal plan, by preference of nations in Treaty. This heretofore rejected
4. force a treaty, or increase of own bottoms, by prohibiting export of produce by foreigners. This also unpalatable—tho’ perhaps best
5. By reciprocating foreign navigation acts, meet other Nations on their narrow, or force them into our liberal, policy.

Note. G. B. rescued her navigation from the Dutch by her act. She is to us what they to her
Note—She will dread Our Example to other Nations—who have not yet reciprocated.
Note. best not to extend reciprocity to ¾ of seamen, because it wd. exclude many who by entering the american service wd. become soon americans & because in time of war they wd. be particularly disposed to change Brit: for American Ships.
1. Objection. G. B. will risk effect of stop to all trade rather yield the point.
2. American people will not persevere in support of self-denying plan.
3. affect the Revenue
4. Unjust to S. States—
5. our trade flourishes now—why not be quiet
6. difficult to ascertain the place of growth &
Answr. to 1. Objn.
G. B. will not suffer stop to trade

(a)because she will lose profits of our exports to her navigation—to her merchants—to her manufacturers—to her revenue.* Her effort to continue the entrepot shews her anxiety on this point.

Tobacco & Rice alone of vast importance
100,000 Hhds. carried to G. B.—12 or 13,000 only consumed there 60,000 bls of Rice of which very little used in G. B.
70,000 tons of Shipping, almost all British employed in carrying these 2 articles to G. B.

*Note her revenue not only arises from duties on Tobo. &c—but from the consumption of those who manufacture for & trade with U. S. & who are enabled by the price we give, to consume the excised articles at home.

Note. G. B. defended herself vs French manufactrs & luxuries in Chas. 2. &c. by prohibitions—see Ex: of Eden’s Treaty p. 11
(b) because she will lose markets for manufactures.*
In the 2 former appeals to mercantile contest—she first yielded—next preferred war.

Luxuries to us—necessaries to her manufacturers.

favor her commercial rivals, which she dreads

favor manufactures in the U. S. of her Staple articles—woollens—Cottons—linnens—leather—Cutlery; and when these once established here, not revert. Several facts well-known, shews her jealousy now—her whole system founded on it before Revolution.

*note the imports into U. S. from Europe, prior to the war, were ¾ British. Champ. p. 51.

Every American employs 4 European Manufactrs.
See Introd. Anderson p. 34.

The consumption of American Plantations & their supply of materials, employ one million of people in G. B. Id. p. 30 & 34.

The commerce with America employs 2000 sail of British Shipping & 20,000. seamen. Id. p. 34.
(b) because W. I. trade essential to her.
See here note ⊙ page after next.
Note W. India trade particularly valuable because short one which multiplies as long ones destroy seamen.

Before the war no provisions sent from G. B. but a few peas & beans & other inconsiderable articles—Salted beef sent from Ireland—Bread & all other articles supplied from the Continent, and at a little more than half the price of like supplies from G. B—U. S. undersell Irish beef &

whole value of commodities from America to W. I. rated by Edwards at £750,000 St:—the expence then of bringg. the same of G. B. a clear loss of nearly the same sum. Champ. 140

Sugar can be got from Maple trees—from Danish Isles & Dutch—with the chance of French & Spanish, which are cheaper the former at least—& the certainty of getting from Europe or illicitly, at a little higher price.

For Rum—the resource of our distilleries—French do. Dutch & Danish do. French brandy.

Not less than 20,000 barrels of Rice sent from S. C. & Geo. to the W. Ind. Champ. p. 165.

Fresh provisions cant be supplied but by the quick & continued voyages of American vessels

tis Asked how the B. Isds. did during the war—1 very badly. 2. diverted the labor to less profitable cultivation to avoid starving. 3. the aid of prizes. 4. what they got from Europe, pd. for by the rise of sugars &c which fell on the Brit: consumers. If the Brit: Isds. were to be maintained at same expence, as they were during the war G. B. cd. not afford to keep them. She had been keep a like no. of Ships & seamen constantly sailing by way of exercise & empty from any given ports equally distant.
Revenue from Rum in G. B—400,000 £ St: which wd be lost if no staves to export it. Ed: Treaty p. 17.

The average of Rum annually imported into G. B. for ten years from 1773 to 1782—was 2,362,842. Gals.—do. exported—617,939. And. v. 6. p. 591.
Do. for 4 years preceding 1777. was 2,375,176 Gals. imported
of which 655,291. exported
from causes not permanent In 1785. 3,014,114. Gal. imported Edens Treaty. p. 49.
[3,135,378 Gals. (dutyed at 2/6 per Gal) of spirit distilled in G. B. from corn in 1782. Id. p. 53.]
Ansr. to 2. Obj viz The people not bear the self-denial.
No evidence to presume it; & the distrust injurious to their character—

In non-importation agreemts. people firm.
The merchts. attached to G. B. or own avidity gave way.
The act then voluntary—now compulsive—
⊙—It is extraordinary indeed that the daring spirit of our commerce, should explore the most distant parts of the globe, and yet shrink from an effort, a peaceable effort, an effort sure of success, for a branch of trade, which Nature seems to have intended for them, to which interest invites them—to which the principle of reciprocity entitles them—& to which self-respect impels them—see ⊙ 2 pages back.

See Acts of the States before New Constitution—In S. Carolina 25 PerCt. laid on British Sugars—Also with other States impower Congs. to regulate with W. Inds. Champ. p 221
In Virga. vote prohibiting Rum— & p. 235

On 30 Apl. 1784. Congs. recommended to States to give powers for 15 years to restrain foreign Commerce not founded in equality—see the Resolution
The act of Massachussts. July 1. 1784 after reciting it & that the power wd. be greatly beneficial—
Enacts that it be granted to prohibit any imports or exports in vessels belonging to or navigated by the subjects of any power with whom Treaties of Commerce shd. not have formed—& to prohibit such subjects from importing any articles not the produce or manufacture of their own Country.

Virga. complied May 19. 1784.
Ansr. to Obj. 3—as to Revenue
(a) G. B. be more affected—& less able to bear the defalcations
(b) The deficiency will not be equal to the progressive increment of revenue.
increase of imports from beginning of century to begining of war—twelvefold—Champion pref. p. xxvi
note the increase of population during the same period at the rate of 25 years—Eightfold only
From the discount of 10 PerCt. of Duties, it wd. seem that American vessels share more with the British in importing than has been supposed. This may be exaggerated 1. by the use of American names &c. to cover British bottoms. 2. by the use of American-built vessels, Owned by Brit: subjects. 3. by shipping goods in American bottoms to U. S. while British vessels are sent empty to carry off exports—quer. the comparative saving in the discount & the expence of freight.


Title: Navigation and Trade, [13 May] 1790
From: Madison, James
To:

[13 May 1790]

   On 10 May the Committee of the Whole took up the report of a select committee on a petition from the merchants and traders of Portsmouth, New Hampshire. This report recommended (1) that the tonnage on foreign vessels be raised from fifty cents to one dollar per ton, and (2) that foreigners be prohibited from carrying United States commodities to any port or place to which United States citizens are prohibited from carrying the same. After three days of debate, the Committee of the Whole approved the one-dollar tonnage duty on foreign vessels. Smith (South Carolina) moved to postpone the commencement of the duty to 1 January 1791, which was agreed to (N.Y. Daily Advertiser, 12, 13, and 14 May 1790; N.Y. Daily Gazette, 13 and 14 May 1790).

Mr. Madison then rose, and observed that if this measure was intended for securing the extension of our navigation, he had doubts whether it would have that effect. He thought it exceptionable on many accounts; neither was it in our power to imitate the regulations which subsist in Great-Britain: that nation was so advantageously circumstanced, that it was easy for them to equipoise their carrying trade, by making a discrimination. But situated as America is, if too much duty should be laid on foreign vessels, we may throw the trade altogether out of our own hands into another channel, and therefore the encouragement which gentlemen aim at giving to our own vessels will not be effected; but even if it should, it is still doubtful whether the advantages will be equivalent to the disadvantages which may be expected to arise from the impolicy of the measure.
Mr. Madison then proceeded to state the amount of the produce of the United States at upwards of three millions sterling, one million of which will find a market in Great-Britain. Previous to the revolution, 309 vessels and 6000 seamen found employ in the exportation of our produce; but the number has decreased since the revolution to 80. The British, he said, was our sole market for most of our produce; and it was an object well-worthy our attention, to hold it; if we excite jealousy, that nation may be induced to retract several indulgencies which are now very advantageous; and it may be expected that they will not consider the present measure as a mark of our disposition to increase the friendly or commercial intercourse between the two countries. Five or six hundred thousand weight of tobacco is exported to that country, which is worth 3 or 400,000 £. sterling; one-eighth or one-tenth of which is consumed by themselves, and they re-export the remainder. Britain has had the exclusive right, hitherto, and monopolized the trade; but the French market, considering the present change in the policy of that country, will most probably become a rival in the American trade with Britain. By late prices-current, the price of rice has risen 24 livres per cwt.
Mr. Madison proceeded to describe the wheat and flour trade, ship building, salt provisions, &c. and observed that if the tax on salt shall be abolished in France, which is a circumstance that may be expected, it would give an advantage to every part of the United States; and indeed, from the many evidences of a liberal system of policy about to be established in France, there was full room to hope for those advantages. In matters of difficulty between countries, our motive should be to do the good and avoid the evil; and if we shew a principle that shall raise the jealousies of foreign nations, they may make it a common cause, and be induced to act in conjunction against us.

After Mr. Madison had dwelt some time upon the trade of the United States, he then said, that if we must encourage our own carrying trade, let it be done in a more decisive manner, by prohibiting foreign bottoms from exporting our produce. England has omitted no opportunity to protect her trade by her navigation laws.
Gentlemen have remarked, that the trade with the West-Indies is favourable to us, and from thence draw an argument in favour of the measure: but if the argument has any weight, it lies against the proposition on the table. He next proceeded to explain the circumstances of the United States, when peace was concluded: it was not then foreseen that the commerce of this country would be exposed to such interruptions, two-thirds of the trade is carried on by British merchants in their own bottoms.
The imports from Great-Britain were the next object of Mr. Madison’s attention. We are their customers, said he, for those imports as much as a farmer is the customer of the shop-keeper, or as the consumer is to the seller; and the profit is always on the part of the seller, not the consumer. But the country can subsist without the town, better than the town can subsist without the country; and the farmer can live better without the shop-keeper, than the shop-keeper without the farmer: thus the importations from England, being in a great degree luxuries, we could do without them, better than England could do without us.
In times of war, which happen every three or four years, or in times of famine, which happen too often in the West-Indies, they depend on this country entirely.
With respect to Spain and Portugal, we might make certain restrictions if necessary; but this he did not think necessary at present, as a commercial treaty may shortly be hoped for.
There are some cases of such a nature, that all we can do is to diminish the degree of sacrifice as much as possible.
Any sacrifices that would be made by the southern states would be compensated by the general advantage. That part of the union, which was most interested in the measure, if a war should take place, could only be defended by a naval force; they would not be secure without one: not that I am in favour, said he, of a naval force, but I would wish that we had the means in case of necessity; the number of seamen, which would be increased by extension of our navigation, would increase our force, and be a safeguard against danger from the sea, as our militia may render it unnecessary to raise any regular troops. If the adoption of these measures throw a heavy weight upon the southern states, it will be lightened by the advantage they enjoy of being excused from any duty on slaves.
Having thus far argued upon the proposition, and shewn that, on the one side, it would not prove efficatious, nor were the objections which he had heard against it valid on the other, he therefore declared his opinion, that a different principle should be adopted, by prohibiting vessels belonging to foreigners from exporting the unmanufactured produce of the United States.
In support of this, he said, if we adopt such a measure, it will prove infallible; it will vastly increase our navigation, and be commensurate to the whole produce of the United States; and if it even should not succeed in that, it would in other respects. There are certain situations wherein we should go to the extent of our powers, or do nothing.