In complying with the various resolutions of Congress, calling for reports on subjects connected with his department, Hamilton had submitted plans which, having been profoundly considered, were well digested, and accompanied by arguments, the force of which it was difficult to resist. His measures were generally supported by a majority of Congress; and, while the high credit of the United States was believed to attest their wisdom, the masterly manner in which his reports were drawn, contributed to raise still higher that reputation for great talents which he had long possessed. To the further admission of these reports, it was determined, on this occasion, to make a vigorous resistance.
But the opposition was not successful. On taking the question the resolution was carried, thirty-one members voting in its favor, and twenty-seven against it.
The report made by Hamilton, in pursuance of this resolution, recommended certain augmentations of the duties on imports, and was immediately referred to the consideration of a committee of the whole House. Resolutions were then passed which were to form the basis of a bill; and which adopted, not only the principles, but, with the exception of a few unimportant alterations, the minute details of the report.
Before the question was taken on the bill a motion was made to limit its duration, the vote upon which marked the progress of opinion in the House respecting those systems of finance which were believed to have established the credit of the United States.
Hamilton had deemed it indispensable to the creation of public credit that the appropriations of funds for the payment of the interest, and the gradual redemption of the principal of the national debt, should be not only sufficient, but permanent also. A party was found in the first Congress who opposed this principle, and were in favor of retaining a full power over the subject in each branch of the Legislature, by making annual appropriations. The arguments which had failed in Congress appear to have been more successfully employed with the people. Among the multiplied vices which were ascribed to the funding system, it was charged with introducing a permanent and extensive mortgage of funds, which was alleged to strengthen unduly the hands of the executive magistrate, and to be one of the many evidences which existed of monarchical propensities in those who administered the government.
The report lately made by Hamilton, and the bill founded on that report, contemplated a permanent increase of the duties on certain specified articles, and a permanent appropriation of the revenue arising from them to the purposes of the national debt. Thirty-one members were in favor of the motion for limiting the duration of the bill, and only thirty against it. By the rules of the House, the speaker has a right first to vote as a member, and, if the numbers should then be equally divided, to decide as speaker. Being opposed to the limitation, the motion was lost by his voice, and Hamilton's measure was carried through in its original form.
On the 8th of May (1792), after an active and interesting session, Congress adjourned to the first Monday in November.
Among the bills passed at this session of Congress the most important were that for the apportionment of the representatives, and that for the augmentation of the military force, inasmuch as the discussion of these measures served to develop the political parties which had begun to divide Congress and the people. In apportioning the representatives many members of Congress endeavored to obtain the largest possible number, in order to preserve the rights of the States and check the power of the executive. On the same principles the army bill was opposed, as having a tendency to increase executive power and patronage, and thus endanger the liberties of the country.
Throughout the United States the party opposed to the constitution had charged its supporters with a desire to establish a monarchy on the ruins of Republican government; and the constitution itself was alleged to contain principles which would prove the truth of this charge. The leaders of that party had, therefore, been ready, from the instant the government came into operation, to discover, in all its measures, those monarchical tendencies which they had perceived in the instrument they opposed.
The salaries allowed to public officers, though so low as not to afford a decent maintenance to those who resided at the seat of government, were declared to be so enormously high, as clearly to manifest a total disregard of that simplicity and economy which were the characteristics of republics. {6}