A desultory debate of two hours took place on it, in the course of which a motion was made by Mr. Grundy to lay the resolution on the table, and negatived—60 to 45.
The following was the course of the debate, which was of too irregular a nature to be reported entire:
Mr. Grundy opposed the motion, because it had already been declared impracticable, by the Committee of Ways and Means, to act properly on the subject at the present session.
Mr. Little supported it, on the ground of his opposition to a suspension of the non-importation act, a measure which he reprobated as injurious to the manufactures of our country, and weakening our measures against Great Britain, of which he considered the non-importation act to be as powerful as any.
Mr. Stow advocated the motion, because he wished the House to redeem the pledge given at the last session, that taxes would be laid at this, and to observe something like consistency in their proceedings.
Mr. Weight was also warmly in favor of the measure, and rather imputed blame to the Committee of Ways and Means for not having before acted on this subject, without waiting for instructions from the House.
Mr. Bibb replied to the remarks which had been made in favor of the resolution. At the last session it was presumed that it would be necessary to lay taxes at this session; but the revenue accruing in the intermediate time had swelled so far beyond its anticipated amount as to render it unnecessary to levy taxes for the service of the ensuing year.
Mr. Wright again spoke in favor of the motion.
Mr. Richardson was decidedly in favor of a repeal or modification of the non-importation act, though he believed both that measure and the imposition of taxes would be necessary to supply the revenue.
Mr. McKim was in favor of the motion, because he was opposed to the suspension or weakening of the non-importation act.