hitherto delayed to come to an ultimate decision hereon-and as some states pertinaciously persisted in claiming exclusive rights to said lands, it was not to be expected that our State would part with all the benefits of its maritime situation until some assurance could be obtained of a participation in common with other states in the back lands, which ought to be considered as a continental acquisition, and to be appropriated accordingly; but this was thrown out as a reason of the delay in question, only conjecturally, not being so assigned in the instructions referred to. After proposing the following alterations, viz.:

1st. That each state retain the power of choosing the officers of the revenue to be collected within its own jurisdiction;

2d. That the revenue arising from this duty be carried to the credit of each state wherein it shall be collected respectively, and deducted from their annual quota of continental requisitions ;

I withdrew, not a little mortified at having been opposed, rather than seconded by my colleague. It ought also to be noted that on this occasion, the extraordinary exertions of our State during the whole contest, and on the opening of the present campaign in special, were mentioned and not contested, and added much weight to the aforegoing representation in behalf of the State; and that the committee have not yet made their report, which no doubt will produce a renewed application to the State. For the same reasons which made it against our interest to make this grant, make it the interest of the whole Union to solicit it, which you may expect will be done with the most unremtting importunity.

After the part I have taken in this matter, which has been done with views the most disinterested, so far as I am personally concerned, my constituents will not expect any direct advise on the subject; and knowing that they possess integrity and abilities sufficient for the places they respectively fill, in all events I shall always endeavor to reconcile myself to their determinations and govern myself by their instructions, however contrary to my private opinion.

A grand committee for the support of public credit, has lately been appointed in Congress; and I shall endeavor, as one of that committee, to bring on a decision respecting the back lands. They would, undoubtedly, be a means in our hands of reviving public credit; they are of vast interest and value, beyond what is generally known or conjectured. A gentleman of no mean talents in finance, thinks well of this plan, and that in a course of time they would enable us to discharge a great part of our national debt. So much in regard to the instruction on that head, referred to in your Excellency's letter of 17th June last.

The Commissioners appointed by the resolve of the 20th of February last,

are to liquidate and put on the list of the funded debt, which is to draw interest, all the certificates issued on account of the continent in the several states. And it is proposed that in the settlement to be made by the said Commissioners, the states have credit for their taxes of all money actually collected and paid in, and be charged with their deficiencies; but this arrangement is not completed nor final, as it would affect individuals in possession of said bills, as I can yet discover.

The recommendation of Congress of February 20th last, for empowering them to settle several states' quotas of expenses incurred before January 1st, 1782, otherwise than by article 8th of the Confederation, has been formally rejected by an act of the Legislature of Virginia. Whether they fear that deviation would be made against their interest, or mean to procrastinate a settlement, I shall not undertake to determine.

Several reductions in public expenditures have taken place since I have had the honor of a seat in Congress. Economy is the present plan. The good work is begun and going on. Much I perceive can yet be done; and my exertions, such as they are, will not be wanting on this subject. Could prompt pay be made to the army, many reductions might take place with propriety and without inconvenience. Is not this an object worthy our attention?

By a resolve of the 23d October, 1780, the officers who shall continue in the service to the end of the war, shall be entitled to half pay during life, as well as those who are reduced by the resolve and permitted to retire, whereby the United States are loaded with half pay officers,—even during the war, and that which was intended as an antidote against depreciation, is continued even now when the army is paid in hard money; and having been originally intended as a motive to keep officers in the army, is now become a temptation for them to leave it.

And what is still more extraordinary, by another resolve, half pay is to be made in all cases in proportion to full pay, so that a Major General and Brigadier General draw their half pay instead of the half pay of a Colonel, against the universal custom in all European nations, where there are half pay establishments. A Major General and a Brigadier General lately applied to Congress for leave to retire on the half pay establishment, and obtained it, and officers of inferior grades in the line are daily retiring on half pay and others are advanced to take their places; whereby we have duplicates and triplicates of officers in some instances, and an enormous expense is incurred.

This, in my opinion, calls loudly on the legislatures of the states, either to provide funds in addition to the five per cent. (which will be insufficient,) or to instruct their delegates to discontinue the practice. I rather wish

for instructions on this head, as I am so unhappy as to differ from my worthy colleage on these points; though I do it with much diffidence and reluc

tance.

A report lies before Congress from the office of Finance recommending the five per cent., a land tax of one dollar per hundred acres, and a capitation tax. From this report Congress has taken and recommended only the five per cent. Query. Would either of the other two be eligible?

July 31st.

This day the Grand Committee referred to above, for reviving credit, reported the expediency of taking up the consideration of the cession made by New York, Connecticut and Virginia, so as ultimately to bring on a decision of Congress upon the subject of the vacant lands. A motion was made, and seconded by me, that next Wednesday be assigned for considering said report; the yeas and nays were called and the question was lost by our State being divided. And so nothing is likely to be done about that part of your Excellency's instructions.

Having already, as I fear, transgressed on your patience, I shall conclude this letter in congratulating your Excellency on the acknowledgment of our Independence by the Seven United Provinces of the Netherlands. This alliance, which we flatter ourseves, is by this time completely formed, is natural, and I cannot doubt, will prove mutually beneficial to the parties. Hoping to be excused for not having written before, as well as for having written so much now, I beg leave to assure your Excellency, that I am with every sentiment of esteem and deference,

Your Excellency's most obedient and most humble servant,
DAVID HOWELL.

P. S.-Please to excuse inaccuracies.

This letter is too long to transcribe; and Mr. Morris has this moment sent me a note, requesting the reasons, in writing, why our State has not complied with the recommendation for five per cent., as he is about to write to the State on that subject.

As presenting the other side of the question, the following letter from Robert Morris to Gov. Greene, is inserted:

OFFICE OF FINANCE, August 2d, 1782.

SIR: I presume you have been, before this, informed that all the states except Rhode Island, have acceded to the Impost Law. A committee of Congress, lately appointed on this subject, did me the honor to request my

attendance, with that of your delegates, to hear the objections from them, and know from me the circumstances attending the requisition. After a long conversation, the committee were about to confer on a report, which, at my request, they were pleased to suspend, that I might have this last opportunity of praying your attention to the subject. And I was induced to make that request, as well for the avoiding of those disagreeable discussions which cannot exist between the Union and an individual state, without induring pernicious consequences, as because it appeared to me that the reasons urged against passing the Impost are not so conclusive as some have thought them to be.

The Hon. Mr. Howell was so kind as to promise that he would state his objections in writing. This he has done, and a copy of them is enclosed. They are

1st. That the Impost would draw a disproportionate supply from either the merchant or consumer.

2d. That Rhode Island imports and consumes more of foreign articles, (in proportion,) than any other state.

3d. That from her maratime situation she is exposed to great losses. 4th. That the exclusive benefit of the impost should be carried to account of the State.

5th. That the impost will raise prices, and therefore manufactures brought from the neighboring states will draw a revenue from Rhode Island. 6th. That the duties imposed by the neighboring states may compel Rhode Island to subsist by foreign articles.

7th. That many men will be employed in the collection.
8th. That it would be evaded by smuggling; and,
9th. That the collection may be objectionable.

To each of these I will reply in their order :

1st. To determine whether the impost will act proportionately or not, we must consider in what respect the proportion is to be taken. If it be a proportion between two of the states, that will be considered under the second head. If it be a proportion among the people of the same state, it is only recurring to the question, whether taxes on consumption are useful; for so long as no man pays the tax but he who chooses to purchase the article, the disproportion (if any,) is of his own creating. The necessity of a revenue to a certain amount, must be admitted. Is it then wise to raise a part of it from the consumption of foreign articles? I say the consumption, because the tax undoubtedly falls upon the consumer and not on the importer. If this be not a wise tax, what shall be substituted? Articles of primary and immediate necessity are made in the State of Rhode Island. Both food and

raiment can be had, without crossing the Atlantic in search of them. Every man, therefore, is at liberty to use foreign articles or not. If he does use them, the tax is voluntary, and therefore cannot be considered as disproportionate, any more than for one man to wear silk, while another wears wool.

2d. That Rhode Island consumes more foreign commodities, in proportion, than any other state in the Union, cannot be admitted. Rhode Island certainly makes many commodities, but the more southern states are in the habit of importing everything.

3d. That Rhode Island is, from its situation, liable to the unhappy accident of war, is true. But this incidental evil, arising from an advantageous position, cannot be adduced as a plea for exemption from public burthens. New York has suffered, at least, as much and as long.

4th. That the exclusive benefit of an impost should be carried to the state where it is collected, is a position unjust in itself, and which would forever prevent laying any duties; wherefore it would cut off not only one of the most productive, but one of the most useful branches of revenue. Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, and some other states, carry on the commerce of their neighbors as well as their own, from which they derive great riches. The duties are always, (like the risks and expenses,) paid by the consumer; for unless this be so, no tolerable reason can be assigned why foreign commodities should be dearer in war than in peace. If, then, a considerable duty were laid by the commercial state, it would fall on the uncommercial neighbors. That neighbor, therefore, would immediately take measures to carry on its own commerce, and prohibit the bringing of articles from the commercial state. These measures would produce a repeal of the duty. I take no notice here of the alterations which would arise; it is sufficient to show that the private view of revenue for the state would be defeated.

5th and 6th. These objections do not appear to me to apply, because, in the first place, I can hardly suppose the neighboring states will ever think of laying duties on their own produce; for, if any of them should, her citizens would be the sufferers. Secondly, if the articles of produce be left uncontrolled by the government, every individual will be a check on the avidity of his neighbor, and if, by this means, a piece of American goods. can be vended cheaper in Rhode Island he will, by the purchase of it, save money to himself, and therefore to the country; and, as the duty is collected only on foreign goods, he will not pay the duty, and, of course, the duty on his state will be so much the less.

7th. The seventh objection will apply more strongly to almost any other kind of tax, because this may be collected by a very small number of men. 8th. The eighth objection I cannot admit, because, forming my opinion