University of Virginia Library

TO N. P. TRIST.

My Dear Sir, Whilst reflecting in my sick bed
a few mornings ago, on the dangers hovering over
our Constitution and even the Union itself, a few
ideas which, tho' not occurring for the first time
had become particularly impressive at the present.
I have noted them by the pen of a friend on the enclosed
paper, and you will take them for what they
are worth. If that be anything, and they happen to
accord with your own view of the subject, they

may be suggested where it is most likely they will
be well received; but without naming or designating
in any manner, the source of them.

I am still confined to my bed with my malady,
my debility, and my age, in triple alliance against me.
Any convalescence therefore must be tedious, not
to add imperfect.

I have not yet ventured on the perusal of the book
you sent me. From passages read to me, I perceive
"that the venom of its shafts" are not without "a
vigor in the bow."

With all my good wishes.

(The paper referred to as inclosed in the foregoing letter.)

The main cause of the discords which hover over our Constitution
and even the union itself, is the tariff on imports; and
the great complaint against the tariff is the inequality of the
burthen it imposes on the planting and manufacturing States,
the latter bearing a less share of the duties on protected
articles than the former. This being the case, it seems reasonable
that an equality should be restored as far as may be, by
duties on unprotected articles consumed in a greater proportion
by the manufacturing States. Let then a selection be made of
unprotected articles, and such duties imposed on them as will
have that effect. The unprotected article of tea for example,
known to be more extensively consumed in the manufacturing
than in the planting States, might be regarded, as pro tanto,
balancing the disproportionate consumption of the protected
article of coarse woolens in the South. As the repeal of the
duty on tea and some other articles has been represented by
southern politicians as more a relief to the North than to the
South it follows, that the North in these particulars, has

for many years paid taxes not proportionately borne by the
South.

Justice certainly recommends some equalizing arrangement;
and in a compound tariff, itself necessary to produce an equilibrium
of the burthen, (a duty on any single article tho
uniform in law being ununiform in its operation,) such an
arrangement might not be impracticable.

Two objections may perhaps be made first, that it might
produce an increase of surplus revenue, which there is an
anxiety to avoid. But as a certain provision for an adequate
revenue will always produce a surplus to be disposed of,
such an addition, if not altogether avoidable, would admit
a like disposition. In any view, the evil could not be so
great as that for which it is suggested as a remedy.

The second objection is, that such an adjustment between
different sections of the nation might increase the difficulty
of a proper adjustment between different descriptions of
people, particularly between the richer and the poorer. But
here again the question recurs, whether the evil as far as
it may be unavoidable, be so great as a continuance of the
threatening discords which are the alternative.

It cannot be too much inculcated that in a Government like
ours, and, indeed, in all governments, and whether in the case
of indirect or direct taxes, it is impossible to do perfect justice
in the distribution of burthens and benefits, and that equitable
estimates and mutual concessions are necessary to approach it.