|
Federalist No. 35
The Same Subject Continued:
Concerning the General Power of Taxation
For the Independent Journal.
Author: Alexander Hamilton
To the People of the State of New York:
BEFORE we proceed to examine any other objections to an indefinite
power of taxation in the Union, I shall make one general remark;
which is, that if the jurisdiction of the national government,
in the article of revenue, should be restricted to particular
objects, it would naturally occasion an undue proportion of the
public burdens to fall upon those objects. Two evils would spring
from this source: the oppression of particular branches of industry;
and an unequal distribution of the taxes, as well among the several
States as among the citizens of the same State.
Suppose, as has been contended for, the federal power of taxation
were to be confined to duties on imports, it is evident that
the government, for want of being able to command other resources,
would frequently be tempted to extend these duties to an injurious
excess. There are persons who imagine that they can never be
carried to too great a length; since the higher they are, the
more it is alleged they will tend to discourage an extravagant
consumption, to produce a favorable balance of trade, and to
promote domestic manufactures. But all extremes are pernicious
in various ways. Exorbitant duties on imported articles would
beget a general spirit of smuggling; which is always prejudicial
to the fair trader, and eventually to the revenue itself: they
tend to render other classes of the community tributary, in an
improper degree, to the manufacturing classes, to whom they give
a premature monopoly of the markets; they sometimes force industry
out of its more natural channels into others in which it flows
with less advantage; and in the last place, they oppress the
merchant, who is often obliged to pay them himself without any
retribution from the consumer. When the demand is equal to the
quantity of goods at market, the consumer generally pays the
duty; but when the markets happen to be overstocked, a great
proportion falls upon the merchant, and sometimes not only exhausts
his profits, but breaks in upon his capital. I am apt to think
that a division of the duty, between the seller and the buyer,
more often happens than is commonly imagined. It is not always
possible to raise the price of a commodity in exact proportion
to every additional imposition laid upon it. The merchant, especially
in a country of small commercial capital, is often under a necessity
of keeping prices down in order to a more expeditious sale.
The maxim that the consumer is the payer, is so much oftener
true than the reverse of the proposition, that it is far more
equitable that the duties on imports should go into a common
stock, than that they should redound to the exclusive benefit
of the importing States. But it is not so generally true as to
render it equitable, that those duties should form the only national
fund. When they are paid by the merchant they operate as an additional
tax upon the importing State, whose citizens pay their proportion
of them in the character of consumers. In this view they are
productive of inequality among the States; which inequality would
be increased with the increased extent of the duties. The confinement
of the national revenues to this species of imposts would be
attended with inequality, from a different cause, between the
manufacturing and the non-manufacturing States. The States which
can go farthest towards the supply of their own wants, by their
own manufactures, will not, according to their numbers or wealth,
consume so great a proportion of imported articles as those States
which are not in the same favorable situation. They would not,
therefore, in this mode alone contribute to the public treasury
in a ratio to their abilities. To make them do this it is necessary
that recourse be had to excises, the proper objects of which
are particular kinds of manufactures. New York is more deeply
interested in these considerations than such of her citizens
as contend for limiting the power of the Union to external taxation
may be aware of. New York is an importing State, and is not likely
speedily to be, to any great extent, a manufacturing State. She
would, of course, suffer in a double light from restraining the
jurisdiction of the Union to commercial imposts.
So far as these observations tend to inculcate a danger of
the import duties being extended to an injurious extreme it may
be observed, conformably to a remark made in another part of
these papers, that the interest of the revenue itself would be
a sufficient guard against such an extreme. I readily admit that
this would be the case, as long as other resources were open;
but if the avenues to them were closed, HOPE, stimulated by necessity,
would beget experiments, fortified by rigorous precautions and
additional penalties, which, for a time, would have the intended
effect, till there had been leisure to contrive expedients to
elude these new precautions. The first success would be apt to
inspire false opinions, which it might require a long course
of subsequent experience to correct. Necessity, especially in
politics, often occasions false hopes, false reasonings, and
a system of measures correspondingly erroneous. But even if this
supposed excess should not be a consequence of the limitation
of the federal power of taxation, the inequalities spoken of
would still ensue, though not in the same degree, from the other
causes that have been noticed. Let us now return to the examination
of objections.
One which, if we may judge from the frequency of its repetition,
seems most to be relied on, is, that the House of Representatives
is not sufficiently numerous for the reception of all the different
classes of citizens, in order to combine the interests and feelings
of every part of the community, and to produce a due sympathy
between the representative body and its constituents. This argument
presents itself under a very specious and seducing form; and
is well calculated to lay hold of the prejudices of those to
whom it is addressed. But when we come to dissect it with attention,
it will appear to be made up of nothing but fair-sounding words.
The object it seems to aim at is, in the first place, impracticable,
and in the sense in which it is contended for, is unnecessary.
I reserve for another place the discussion of the question which
relates to the sufficiency of the representative body in respect
to numbers, and shall content myself with examining here the
particular use which has been made of a contrary supposition,
in reference to the immediate subject of our inquiries.
The idea of an actual representation of all classes of the
people, by persons of each class, is altogether visionary. Unless
it were expressly provided in the Constitution, that each different
occupation should send one or more members, the thing would never
take place in practice. Mechanics and manufacturers will always
be inclined, with few exceptions, to give their votes to merchants,
in preference to persons of their own professions or trades.
Those discerning citizens are well aware that the mechanic and
manufacturing arts furnish the materials of mercantile enterprise
and industry. Many of them, indeed, are immediately connected
with the operations of commerce. They know that the merchant
is their natural patron and friend; and they are aware, that
however great the confidence they may justly feel in their own
good sense, their interests can be more effectually promoted
by the merchant than by themselves. They are sensible that their
habits in life have not been such as to give them those acquired
endowments, without which, in a deliberative assembly, the greatest
natural abilities are for the most part useless; and that the
influence and weight, and superior acquirements of the merchants
render them more equal to a contest with any spirit which might
happen to infuse itself into the public councils, unfriendly
to the manufacturing and trading interests. These considerations,
and many others that might be mentioned prove, and experience
confirms it, that artisans and manufacturers will commonly be
disposed to bestow their votes upon merchants and those whom
they recommend. We must therefore consider merchants as the natural
representatives of all these classes of the community.
With regard to the learned professions, little need be observed;
they truly form no distinct interest in society, and according
to their situation and talents, will be indiscriminately the
objects of the confidence and choice of each other, and of other
parts of the community.
Nothing remains but the landed interest; and this, in a political
view, and particularly in relation to taxes, I take to be perfectly
united, from the wealthiest landlord down to the poorest tenant.
No tax can be laid on land which will not affect the proprietor
of millions of acres as well as the proprietor of a single acre.
Every landholder will therefore have a common interest to keep
the taxes on land as low as possible; and common interest may
always be reckoned upon as the surest bond of sympathy. But if
we even could suppose a distinction of interest between the opulent
landholder and the middling farmer, what reason is there to conclude,
that the first would stand a better chance of being deputed to
the national legislature than the last? If we take fact as our
guide, and look into our own senate and assembly, we shall find
that moderate proprietors of land prevail in both; nor is this
less the case in the senate, which consists of a smaller number,
than in the assembly, which is composed of a greater number.
Where the qualifications of the electors are the same, whether
they have to choose a small or a large number, their votes will
fall upon those in whom they have most confidence; whether these
happen to be men of large fortunes, or of moderate property,
or of no property at all.
It is said to be necessary, that all classes of citizens should
have some of their own number in the representative body, in
order that their feelings and interests may be the better understood
and attended to. But we have seen that this will never happen
under any arrangement that leaves the votes of the people free.
Where this is the case, the representative body, with too few
exceptions to have any influence on the spirit of the government,
will be composed of landholders, merchants, and men of the learned
professions. But where is the danger that the interests and feelings
of the different classes of citizens will not be understood or
attended to by these three descriptions of men? Will not the
landholder know and feel whatever will promote or insure the
interest of landed property? And will he not, from his own interest
in that species of property, be sufficiently prone to resist
every attempt to prejudice or encumber it? Will not the merchant
understand and be disposed to cultivate, as far as may be proper,
the interests of the mechanic and manufacturing arts, to which
his commerce is so nearly allied? Will not the man of the learned
profession, who will feel a neutrality to the rivalships between
the different branches of industry, be likely to prove an impartial
arbiter between them, ready to promote either, so far as it shall
appear to him conducive to the general interests of the society?
If we take into the account the momentary humors or dispositions
which may happen to prevail in particular parts of the society,
and to which a wise administration will never be inattentive,
is the man whose situation leads to extensive inquiry and information
less likely to be a competent judge of their nature, extent,
and foundation than one whose observation does not travel beyond
the circle of his neighbors and acquaintances? Is it not natural
that a man who is a candidate for the favor of the people, and
who is dependent on the suffrages of his fellow-citizens for
the continuance of his public honors, should take care to inform
himself of their dispositions and inclinations, and should be
willing to allow them their proper degree of influence upon his
conduct? This dependence, and the necessity of being bound himself,
and his posterity, by the laws to which he gives his assent,
are the true, and they are the strong chords of sympathy between
the representative and the constituent.
There is no part of the administration of government that
requires extensive information and a thorough knowledge of the
principles of political economy, so much as the business of taxation.
The man who understands those principles best will be least likely
to resort to oppressive expedients, or sacrifice any particular
class of citizens to the procurement of revenue. It might be
demonstrated that the most productive system of finance will
always be the least burdensome. There can be no doubt that in
order to a judicious exercise of the power of taxation, it is
necessary that the person in whose hands it should be acquainted
with the general genius, habits, and modes of thinking of the
people at large, and with the resources of the country. And this
is all that can be reasonably meant by a knowledge of the interests
and feelings of the people. In any other sense the proposition
has either no meaning, or an absurd one. And in that sense let
every considerate citizen judge for himself where the requisite
qualification is most likely to be found.
PUBLIUS.
Federalist No. 36 -->
|