{"character_count": 5687, "word_count": 1003, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9749000072479248], "ccnet_perplexity": [804.5], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}


 Mir President, the loss of these twenty millions of dollars, is not the worst feature ot the law. If 1t was, the people could bear It without great hardship. The products oi the industry and labor of our country are over one thousand millions per annum. This twenty millions loss. would only be abont } per cent on the whole, which could be easilv borne, But the three millions distributed, never finds it's way back to the tax payers.

 In the last distribution, some States made bank capital of t. Ohio divided 1t among the counties, to be loaned out on interest: some States expended it on internal improve ments; while other States loaned 1t out 10 companies and rail road corporations. None ol the three millions ever got back to the tax payers. Among these modes of disposition ol the money, l would enquire of any friend of the measure, how much would ever find its way to the industrious and producing classes who first earned and paid the money:

 would do the subject great injustice, were to conline my objection to il to it's pecuni- ary evils. The greatest objection 10 the law is Its dangerous influence operating on the State Legislatures. Responsibility is the power the people exercise over their representatives. il a State Legislature IS prodigal in its expen- dlmres, they have to tax the people to sus- tain that prodigality. The people feel the pressure Ql the tax, and at the next election select wiser and more economical represen- tatlyes. When money IS appropriated by State for any object, tax has to be laid to raise that money, and the people examine well into the wisdom of the measure before they acquiesce in the burthen. But could State Legislatures appropriate money without taxing their constituents to raise 1t, there would be no check nor bound to their ex- travagance. Each member would try how much money he could get expended among his constituents. And if our State legsla- lures are too extravagant now, fearful as they are. to tax their constituents, what would they then be, untammelled, uuteuefed, un- controlled This bond selling system of some of the States, would picture their course in legislation.

 Mir. President: Our structure of Govern ment is peculiar. We have two governments, both acting on the same person at the same time. Both have to be sustained by a reve- nue. At the time our Federal Government was framed, the States were raising revenue i by direct taxation; that is, tax on property according 10 its value. The States surren- dered to the federal government the power to raise revenue by indirect taxes, that is, impost duties. Direct taxes is the iairest mode to raise revenue. IL falls on wealth and property, and every person pays accord ing 10 his capacity to pay. Indirect taxation falls upon labor and industry. It Is a tax OH imports, and we bring but lew articles from abroad but such as are necessaries. From woollen cotton goods, sal, sugar, hardware, all which articles are used in nearly as large a degree by laboring men and mechanic i'll moderate circumstances, as by the rich and the wealthy Indirect taxation can only be justified in support of a national government Each citizen pays almost the same amount of taxes. He also enjoys in the same degree the protection of the government. For the people Of the United States, to support their Sla,e governments in their expensive career of internal improvements, by a revenue from impost duties, would be manifest injustice to individuals. Twill give an illustration. Sup pose million of dollars is to be raised by a tax on the necessaries of life. The indus trious mechanic, or farmer who rents his land, pays probably as much tax on these ar f 4tcles as the man who owns a thousand acres l of land, worth fifty thousand dollars. This million of dollars is given say to the State of New ' ork. Her legislature appropfates It 10 cut q canal through part of the State - This canal passes near or through the thou sand acres above referred to 1t adds 10 their aitto q, IOl lars. The owner of the land is made that much richer, while the farmer and mechanic who paid an equal amount with the land owner to make this improvement, are bene- fitted not a cent. This whole distribution system tends to exempt wealth and property from taxation, and place 1t on industry and the neeessaries of life. Thus the policy is make the poor, poorer, and the rich, richer In tie language of Webster, to fertilize the rich mans field by the sweat of the poor mans brow.

 Another evil springing from this dlstribu- ton law, 1t would create new topic to elec- toneer*on. Each candidate for Congress would hope to be elected by promising to draw the largest possible amount 10 his State from the public lands. He would endeavor to succeed in his election by out bidding his competitor. And this feeling would not only ] exist while they were candidates; they would cary il with them to Washington, and the member who acted with most rigor to the new States, and with the greatest injustice to the purchasers of public lands, would be the one most likely to succeed in his next elec- ton. State legislatures that had acted prodi- gal or exravagant, and become involved il debt, would beatraid to tax their constituents and would naturally turn their eyes on thl new States, to see how much money coule be drawn from them. And having no inter est in our welfare, or sympathy in our feel

 ngs, they would pursue that policy by which they could draw from us the larges amount of money. So 1t was with the min isters of England. Embarrassed with debt and fearing to increase their taxes at home they sought uajusty to tax their colonies which resulted in our separation Is theIf