Mr McHenry conceived that power to be included in the power of war.
Mr Wilson. Pennsylvania exports the produce of Maryd N. Jersey, Delaware & will by & by when the River Delaware is opened, export for N. York. In favoring the general power over exports therefore, he opposed the particular interest of his State. He remarked that the power had been attacked by reasoning which could only have held good in case the Genl Govt had been compelled, instead of authorized, to lay duties on exports. To deny this power is to take from the Common Govt half the regulation of trade. It was his opinion that a power over exports might be more effectual than that over imports in obtaining beneficial treaties of commerce.
Mr Gerry was strenuously opposed to the power over exports. It might be made use of to compel the States to comply with the will of the Genl Government, and to grant it any new powers which might be demanded. We have given it more power already than we know how will be exercised. It will enable the Genl Govt to oppress the States as much as Ireland is oppressed by Great Britain.
Mr Fitzimmons [36] would be agst a tax on exports to be laid immediately; but was for giving a power of laying the tax when a proper time may call for it. This would certainly be the case when America should become a manufacturing Country. He illustrated his argument by the duties in G. Britain on wool &c.
[ [36] "Mr. Fitzsimons is a Merchant of considerable talents, and speaks very well I am told, in the Legislature of Pennsylvania. He is about 40 years old."–Pierce's Notes, Am. Hist. Rev., iii., 328.
Col. Mason. If he were for reducing the States to mere corporations as seemed to be the tendency of some arguments, he should be for subjecting their exports as well as imports to a power of general taxation. He went on a principle often advanced & in which he concurred, that "a majority when interested will oppress the minority." This maxim had been verified by our own Legislature (of Virginia). If we compare the States in this point of view the 8 Northern States have an interest different from the five Southn States; and have in one branch of the legislature 36 votes agst 29. and in the other in the proportion of 8 agst 5. The Southern States had therefore ground for their suspicions. The case of Exports was not the same with that of imports. The latter were the same throughout the States; the former very different. As to Tobacco other nations do raise it, and are capable of raising it as well as Virga &c. The impolicy of taxing that article had been demonstrated by the experiment of Virginia.
Mr Clymer [37] remarked that every State might reason with regard to its particular productions, in the same manner as the Southern States. The middle States may apprehend an oppression of their wheat flour, provisions &c. and with more reason, as these articles were exposed to a competition in foreign markets not incident to Tobo rice &c. They may apprehend also combinations agst them between the Eastern & Southern States as much as the latter can apprehend them between the Eastern & middle. He moved as a qualification of the power of taxing Exports that it should be restrained to regulations of trade by inserting after the word "duty" sect 4 art VII the words, "for the purpose of revenue."
[ [37] "Mr. Clymer is a Lawyer of some abilities;–he is a respectable Man and much esteemed. Mr. Clymer is about 40 years old."–Pierce's Notes, Am. Hist. Rev., iii., 328.
On question on Mr Clymer's motion
N. H. no. Mass. no. Ct no. N. J. ay. Pa ay. Del. ay. Md no. Va no. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no.