The Congressional Globe, Volume 21, Part 1: Thirty-First Congress, First Session Page: 877

                                
1850.
THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE.
877
or asking alms. You will find but few paupers.
You will find no forty thousand demanding the
right to labor, as he saw was stated to be the case
not long since in the city of New York. But all
her people asked was, to be let alone. If the peo-
ple of Ohio, New York, or Massachusetts, were
better pleased with their social condition, the peo-
ple of Georgia did not care. They were content
to remain as they were, and to go on in the prog-
ress they had commenced, prosperous and to
prosper.
Mr. SWEETSER interrupted, and asked if the
factories in Georgia had not been erected by north-
ern capitalists.
Mr. STEPHENS said, no. They were built
by Georgia capital, and all her improvements had
been built and paid for out of Georgia capital. Her
public bonds and securities were owned and held
mostly by her own people. They were not hawked
about in northern markets at a depreciation, but in
nearly every instance, he believed, were command-
ing a premium at home.
The hour of one having arrived, the debate,
according to previous order, terminated.
Mr. THOMPSON, of Pennsylvania, availing
himself of the puvilege allowed to the gentleman
reporting a bill, addressed the committee. He said,
it has not been my intention to detain this commit-
tee with any extended remarks—the spcech which
has just been made by the gentleman from Geor-
gia, [Mr. Stephens,] renders it necessary that I
should occupy their attention for a short time.
But the gentleman will pardon me when I say, that
I cannot perceive any great force in the arguments
which he advances; and 1 shall not, therefore, no-
tice them to a very great extent. 1 do not under-
stand them, sir. They possess the merit of too
much refinement, for a merely common-sense mind
to comprehend them. So far as regards the eulogy
which has been pronounced by the gentleman upon
the State of Georgia, I congratulate him, and I con-
gratulate the State upon her prosperous condition;
and I hope she may ever remain so.
This census would be of little use, Mr. Chair-
man, if every gentleman on this floor had an
opportunity to declare the statistics of the dif-
ferent States, and have them collected and pub-
lished, through the medium of speeches or other-
wise, as the gentleman from Georgia has done.
I have no doubt the State of Georgia is all she
has been represented to be. I am glad of her
prosperity. But, sir, we have a little speck of
nullification, about the size of a man's finger, rising
above the horizon again; and I have not forgotten
the census panic of 1840, which convulsed the
glorious State of Georgia, notwithstanding all her
propriety. A story-teller of that day tells us
with what horror the chicken man, as the marshal
was called, was regarded by the old women of
that country. The honorable gentleman notifies
us now, that he will be found side by side with
those old ladies, in resisting the aggression of the
census taker, should he again make his appear-
ance. 1 trust that it will be a bloodies war, and
that nobody will be kilted, although some may be
frightened. The chickens are not in this bill,
however.
What is the constitutional question, that we hear
so much said about? I beg the committee will
give me their attention upon this point for a mo-
ment. What is the constitutional question that
has been presented here? It is said that we have
no power to take these statistics. My first an-
swer to that is, that it might be considered an in-
cident to the taxing power. Gentlemen have read
elaborate documents, to show that direct taxes
only depend on the census. Agreed—nobody
doubts that. But indirect taxes depend solely
upon the will of Congress. That is the whole
question. Direct taxes depend upon the census,
by the express terms of the Constitution. Indirect
taxes depend upon the will of Congress. Now,
suppose Congress should see fit to impose indirect
taxes? How are they to do it without this in-
formation? Why, gentlemen seem to think that
wc shall do better if we act m the dark, than if
we have light; that we shall do better to remain in
ignorance, than if we obtain information. I know
it was once said by a poet,
"Where ignorance is bliss, 'lis folly to be wise;"
but that sentiment can scarcely apply in matters
of this kind. Let gentlemen examine, and see if
we cannot impose indirect taxes. In 1813, we
taxed furniture, we taxed carriages, we taxed
watches, and other articles of personal property,
by act of Congress. Well, cannot we do it again ?
And would the gentleman from Georgia prefer
passing a law for that purpose, without knowing
how ^pfiuch property of any description the peo-
ple of this Union are possessed of? Such is his
argument. Why should we confine a strict con-
struction of the Constitution to direct taxation?
The whole scope of taxation is before us, from
which to derive this power. Is it necessary for
me to refer to the la^s on our statute books to
show that we may levy excise duties and establish
imposts? I suppose not. If we may do that,
why may we not derive the information necessary
to impose direct or indirect taxes, should it ever
become necessary to do so? But Intake no ad-
vantage of a mere technicality.
What is the argument of gentlemen on the other
side ? The gentleman from Georgia says, that yoo
may exercise an incidental power, but you must de
it only when you are just about to act upon the
principal power. That is the argument of the
gentleman, and it is the argument of my highly
respected friend from Texas, [Mr. Kaufman.]
Will those gentlemen be so good as to inform me,
by what right we authorize the making of harbor
improvements? In what part of the Constitution
is this right to be found? It is, I apprehend, an
incident to the power to regulate commerce. And
when you make a harbor, you make it in anticipa-
tion of commerce. You make it before any com-
merce can begin to enter such harbor. Commerce
may, or may not, be directed to that harbor there-
after. Here, then, you legislate upon the inciden-
tal po^er, and commerce follows, or not, as cir-
cumstances may direct. Now, how do i apply
this? I do it in this way: You are entitled to
collect this information as an incident to the power
to levy internal taxes upon the internal products of
the country. And if the time should arrive—
though I trust it may never come—when it will be
necessary to levy a tax of this kind, you will be
prepared with the requisite information with re-
gard to the agricultural and manufacturing estab-
lishments, and also with regard to the productive
interests of the country. And you will thus, too,
be prepared to exercise your constitutional right
in arranging the tax as it may best suit the inter-
ests of the country. Thus it will be seen that it
may become the basis of legislation at some
period.
The honorable gentleman from Georgia says,
that taxes should be direct, in all cases. 1 am not
in favor of direct taxes. But I shall hot shelter
myself behind even that technicality. 1 make no
argument upon it. Sir, we possess the power to
procure this information upon another ground.
What is it? It is the right to enlighten the legis-
lative mind. We have powers that we can exe-
cute—constitutional powers that we are required
to execute, and which concern the whole country,
and consequently affect the interests of all; and
the intelligent execution of which powers pertains
to every member of this legislative body, and these
lights should be provided for in every manner prac-
ticable, not inconsistent with the Constitution it-
self. But I shail not dwell upon this part of the
subject, because I have a few remarks to make in
reply to gentlemen who have participated in this
discussion.
in the first place, I must be permitted to say,
that I have never in my life heard so much argu-
ment, so earnestly urged, upon such slender
grounds. There is scarcely a gentleman who has
argued upon the principles involved in this bill,
who seems to have read the bill. Why, sir, the
gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Woodward]
the other day described, in the most deprecating
and exciting terms, the horrors of administering
an oath to an old lady, and requiring her to give
answers to interrogatories. Sir, that was but one
of the rich pictures of his own fancy.
Mr. WOODWAKD. Was it not m the Senate
bill?
Mr. THOMPSON. I was under the impres-
sion that the gentleman was talking upon the bill
now before the House.
Mr. WOODWARD I would like to know
which of the bills is likely to pass.
Mr. THOMPSON. I have only to say, that
the Senate bill contains no such proposition. There
was a section of the bill which declared, that the
marshal, when he called upon a family to ascer-
tain the number of the members of such family,
should also ascertain the ages and sexes of them.
Nobody was to be sworn to give true replies in
regard to any of these statistics. Not a word of it.
Someone member of the family is to be called,
and he gives the answers for all. The gentleman
tells us that he dislikes this bill, because it pro-
poses inquiry as to the ages of individuals. There
seems a sort of old maidishness about some gen-
tlemen—an unwillingness to be questioned as to
age. I have teamed a curious fact in regard to this
I thing of disclosing the age of individuals, in the
j English statistics. It there appears, notwithstand-
; ing the slander is all the other way, that refusals
. to declare on the part of the men, (in taking their
' census,) were as ten against one on the part of
the females.
I Well, the gentleman says he has read the bill,
• and he prefers the substitute offered by the gentle-
man from Ohio, [Mr. Miller.] But the very
1 thing he objects to in this bill, he encounters in
that of the gentleman from Ohio. The name, age,
and sex are required by that bill, or amendment;
and yet, this is what he objects to in the bill under
consideration. How is this to be managed? The
same questions, sir—the same impertinent inqui-
ries that the gentleman would not answer! He
says we are proposing to send our marshals to ask
a thousand impertinent questions. A thousand,
sir! The gentleman is as near the truth as one
^hundred and seventeen is to one thousand ! The
remark is correct in precisely that ratio. Why do
we ask these questions with regard to age? Be-
cause we want to know the physical condition of
the country. And every census that has been
taken, from 1790 to this time, has contained the
same inquiry. The first census bill that was
passed after the Constitution was adopted—and
passed, too, by a Congress in which were such
men as Madison, Sherman,. Livingston, and
Washington himself at the head of the Govern-
ment—contained a provision for ascertaining the
ages of the people of the country. Those between
certain ages were classified—as between five and
ten, ten and fifteen, and so, upwards.
But there is one thing more which I must put
gentlemen in mind of while it is on my mind.
That settling of accounts is always unpleasant,
; but it is sometimes quite necessary. Do you
| recollect, sir, when the bill for taking the census
in 1849 was passed? I have no doubt your
i hawk's eye was upon it, and that you heard the
| speeches that were made upon that occasion.
' Now I claim the attention of the gentlemen from
Georgia and South Carolina, and the gentleman
| from Ohio, while I propound a question in regard
to 
[ Mr. WOODWARD. I have not the privilege
of answerin^the gentleman.
Mr. THOMPSON. I will say, so that it may
appear in the report of my speech, that I have the
privilege of making the last speech, and that the
gentleman from South Carolina will not have the
privilege of replying. This is true; but I cannot
pass over the point I intended to allude to before
I was interrupted. I must be allowed to refer to
the act of the last session of Congress on this sub-
ject. It is important to see how we all stand in
regard to this bill. On the 1st of March, 1849,
Mr. Palfrey asked the unanimous consent of the
House to introduce a bill; and that being denied,
he moved a suspension of the rule, which, being
agreed to, he introduced a bill for the purpose of
making arrangements for taking the seventh cen-
sus. Now, what are the provisions of that bill ?
I will read it, sir, and see if it does not provide
for taking all the statistics included in these
schedules;
" That the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Home
Department, (it'such < ffice bylaw created,) ami the Pay-
master Genet a!, shall constitute and be a hoanJ, to be styled
the Census Board; that it shall be the duty of tbn *aid
boaid to piepare and cause to be printed such foimsand
schedule" a< may be necessary foi the full cnumeiation of
' the inhabitants ot the knifed States, and also pioper fouiu
and schedules* Tor collecting in statistical tobies, under
proper heads, such information as to mines, agriculture,
commerce, manufactures, education, and other topus, as
will exhibit a full view of the pursuits, inriii--tiy, education,
and resources of the country j it being provided that the
number of said mqunies, exclusive of the enumeration,
shail not exceed one hundred, and that ihe expense mcuired
in preparing and printing said Conns and schedules shall not
exceed ten thou>and dollars/5
Did that bill pass? Yes sir, it passed. Now
let me ask, where was the argus-eyes of the gentle-
man from Georgia, when the Constitution was
thusabout to be violated by the passage of that bill ?