COL. YOUNG opposed the motion. It was neither more nor less than a nák ed proposition to lay direct taxes for the purpose of increasing the school funda GEN. VAN RENSSELAER replied, when the question was put and lost.

The first part of the section as amended, relative to the school fund, was thes carried in the affirmative, without a division.

On the residue of the section relative to the canal fund.

MR. RUSSELL moved to amend so much thereof as relates to the duties on salt, and the tolls on the canal, by substituting therefor the following:

"That the tolls on the navigable communications between the great western and northern lakes and the Atlantic ocean; and the duties on the manufacture of salt within the state, as may be established by the legislature, shall be inviolably appropriated and applied to the payment of the interest and reimbursement of the capital of the money already borrowed, or which hereafter shall be borrowed to make and complete the navigable communications aforesaid, and for no other purpose whatever,"

MR. KING remarked, that the duties and tolls were pledged by the legisla ture as the representatives of the people, and he thought the Convention were bound to sanction that pledge. No additional assurance is required. It is only to confirm what has been already promised. The faith of the country has gone forth, and those who are intrusted with the public honour, cannot recall without redeeming it. The western part of the state was doubtless destined to be the most populous part of it. They will furnish a majority in the legislature. He alluded to that part of the state, and the members of it, with great deference and respect. But the history and condition of mankind have shown, that when men are impelled by interest, and possess the power of relieving themselves from a burthen, they are extremely apt to lighten it off from their own shoulders. He would merely allude to a state of things that might hereafter exist. And were the state of things reversed, it would, in his opinion, be perfectly proper that the South should then be put under bonds. What is a mortgage, a common instrument, but a pledge for good behaviour? Mr. K. said he was not wanting in respect or affection for his western brethren, but in fidelity to the common interest of the state, the committee could not do less than recommend such a provision. There was no intimacy that could forbid such a proposition, even among brothers. The state derived great honour from the magnificence of this work. And do we not expect to receive great advantage from it? Why, then, should we be averse to confirming a pledge that was made in good faith? The pledge is mutual. It is a pledge on our part also that the work shall go on, and that future funds shall be created to ensure its completion. The different parts of the state were bound up in one society, and connected by the strongest sympathies of interest and feeling.

MR. RUSSELL said that the requiring a pledge of this kind to be incorporated in the constitution, could not be regarded in any other way than as to express a distrust of the integrity of the people of the western part of the state; and he must therefore resist it He was confident that there was no good reason for this jealousy; the people of the west would have no disposition to violate the faith which had been pledged.

MR. NELSON. From the report of the committee, and the explanation given by the honourable chairman, it would appear that the duty on salt in the western district is not only to be inviolably appropriated to the payment of the interest and redemption of the principal of the canal debt, but that the amount of that duty is to be fixed in the constitution. We are told, that it was pledged by the act of 1817, and that we ought to renew it in the Convention. When that law was passed, and the pledge given, a Convention was not expected; why then should we engraft it in the constitution? Let us leave it as we find ib.

By the act of 1817 the duty on all sales at auction, with the exceptions then mentioned, were pledged in conjunction with the salt duty. Why have not the committee fixed in the constitution the amount of those duties, so as to prevent legislative discretion hereafter on that subject?

In the same act also a tax of one dollar per passenger for every 100 miles, was laid on steam boat possengers, and pledged for the same purpose in conjunction with the salt duty, and that upon auctions. Why is not that tax perpetuated by constitutional provision? All these funds were raised by the same act, and pledged for the same purpose-and why make any distinction between them, if there must be a constitutional provision?

Mr. Nelson was not unwilling that the revenues which government may see fit to collect from the salt on the canal, should be inviolably appropriated to the extinguishment of the canal debt. They have been so pledged by the act of 1817, but the amount of that tax or tell ought to be left to legislative regulation. The distribution of the burthens of government is a subject of legislation, not for the Convention. It is the business of the persons administering the government to devise ways and means for meeting its expenses, or raising money to carry on public improvement. The amount of the duty on salt is not a subject of complaint among those whom it is supposed most immediately to effect. It is not that they desire to get rid of the payment of the duty, that I object to its being fixed in the constitution: but, sir, the affairs of this state may change with the times, and the interest of the people may require that this duty should be abolished or reduced; if those times should arrive the legislature ought not to be prevented by constitutional prohibition.

Suppose, sir, the revenue derived from the canal tolls should be so great that, in a few years, that alone would redeem the canal debt, might it not be wise in the legislature to reduce the revenue realized from the salt, and leave the discharge of that debt to the tolls?

Or, suppose the legislature should believe the interest of the community required that a part of the duty imposed upon salt should be taken off, and laid upon some other subject of taxation, ought they not to have the power of doing so? By fixing the amount of the salt tax, you deprive the western part of this state of the benefit of legislative experience and discretion on this subject. The tax imposed on steam boat passengers has been modified by a subsequent legislature, so may be the duties on salt, or any other pledge given by act.

Mr. Nelson said, it looked like an unreasonable jealousy of one part of the state toward the other, or of those who are to come after us. Gentlemen from the west might as well indulge in squeamish jealousies of the south or north, and for fear they might hereafter impose an enormous tax upon our western salt, ask this Convention to fix it in the constitution, that no legislature should raise the tax above one shilling per bushel. If they will not trust the west in the legislature, lest they might be disposed to reduce the tax, the west should not trust the south and the north, lest they may raise it.

But it is unreasonable and unjust that the Convention should legislate for posterity, or for any particular portion of this state. The subjects, of taxation ought in his opinion, to be left to the discretion of future legislatures, whose dignity and honour would never permit them to act contrary to public faith or public good. Unfounded jealousies never ought to be indulged, and he never could consent to vote for a clause in the constitution avowedly based upon a want of confidence of one section of this state in the other.

COL. YOUNG was very sorry that gentlemen in different parts of the state should regard this as a local question. He thought it was a subject in which all sections were equally interested. In relation to the salt duty he would observe, that within three years the people of the east would consume the western salt, an:1 when the New-York market will be entirely supplied with salt from the western salt-works; it was now sold at Utica for two shillings per bushel, including the duty of twelve and an half cents. When the communication with the North River should be completed, this salt might be brought to the city of New-York, and sold there for less than half the sum now paid for salt in that market; and the whole state would then consume no other salt but this, and every man who purchased a bushel of it, would pay one shilling towards the ca. nal fund; In the west, the people had already reaped great advantage from the canal. Notwithstanding the duty of twelve and an half cents per bushel, the western people now paid no more for the salt than they did before the duty was imposed.

The toll which the commissioners had established, was extremely small; not exceeding one cent per ton, and on salt about half a cent. To carry a ton from Albany to Buffalo, by land, he said, cost from ninety to one hundred dollars. When the canal was completed it would be carried for about seven dollars. It did, therefore, appear to him, that there ought to be no objection to this provision from any quarter.

MR. EASTWOOD said they had no objection to the price of the duty which was now put on salt, but they were not willing it should be put into the constitution. If the amendments were separately presented to the people, he had not much fear about it: but the people of the western counties would be up in arms about it, if the constitution should be made anew, so as to require a single vote upon the whole or none.

GEN. ROOT observed, that he had rather have no provision at all in the constitution, respecting the canal pledge, than to insert that of the gentleman from Erie, (Mr. Russell.) This fund was pledged to those who made the loan. Pass this amendment, and it would be paramount to the statute of 1817, and it would release the legislature from that pledge. The people have power undoubtedly to violate that pledge; but the power is one thing, and the moral right is another. A few years ago a local tax was pretended to be imposed on the lands bordering on the canal. He was aware at the time, that it was a mere pretence to gild the pill. But every effort since that time, to levy and collect that tax, has been fruitless and unavailing.

But it is said, that we must rely on the legislature, and that the people will be magnanimous. He was aware that if the pledge was continued, some might feel the weight of its obligation, but if the amendment obtained, it would wholly cease to operate. Some legislators were not much restrained by pledges. A steam boat tax was once levied and pledged for this purpose, but a subsequent legislature, under the shield of modification, reduced it to $5000, and magnanimously appropriated Grand Island to supply the deficiency. The pledge of 1817 had not, therefore, remained inviolate, but it was not entirely gone, and he wished to save the remainder by a constitutional provision. Suppose no such provision should be made. What will be the consequence? A new census will shortly be taken and a new apportionment made, when your northern and western canals, and your lateral cuts, will cut in upon two-thirds of the legislature, and vote down the tolls and duties all together. Your legislature has already voted away and got rid of your lands, and we are told, on this floor, that if we require them to pay their debts, the western country will be in arms. If this be the case, it is best to try the experiment soon. Hercules is yet young, and may be bound. The lion of the west, of whom we have often heard, is yet a whelp, not full grown; let us then, endeavour to curb his ferocions power before he tears us in pieces. From five to ten millions of dollars are fastened upon us already, from which there is no escaping. The farms of all the good people of Delaware are mortgaged for the payment, when, at the same time, they derive not the least possible benefit from it. They have then a right to demand, that the inducements that were held out, and the faith that was solemnly pledged, should be redeemed by an irrevocable provision in the constitution. Good faith requires it. Common honesty requires it. It was the right of his constituents to demand it.

Mr. R. entertained no jealousy of his western brethren. As individuals, he would repose in them with a secure and unsuspecting confidence. But as a public body-in a collective capacity, it was as unreasonable to ask, as it was foolish to expect, the performance of those promises which individual justice would scorn to violate. The faith of public bodies is well understood; and the same man, who, as an individual, would shrink from every act that savoured of injustice, would often, in a public capacity, be guilty of violations of duty that were wholly irreconcileable with justice and duty. They would pocket private honesty, and adopt political expediency.

Mr. R. proceeded to investigate the progress of the canal-the pretences that had been made use of-the policy that had been resorted to-the inducements that had been held out-the direct promises and pledges that had been made, until at last it became a hobby so very alluring, that the only anxiety

was, which political party should get foremost astride of it, and spend with the greatest profusion the public treasure. It was not his expectation that all the golden promises would be realized. On that point, as on many others connected with it, his hopes were few and feeble; but he did feel, that it was both his right and his duty to claim the punctual and assured fulfilment of that pledge which the statute book had recorded.

MR. BACON said, that it could not be concealed, that this question was one which had some local bearings on a particular part of the state, over other parts; to be called to act on such a question, was always undesirable, and placed the representative of that portion of the state who were more particularly affected, in a most invidious and unwelcome situation. If he voted in favour of that interest, his conduct would probably be attributed to personal or local interest, and if he voted against it, it might appear like the affectation of magnanimity which could not be appreciated, and might be noticed only to be scoffed at. In the vote which he thought it his duty to give, he would make no such professions. Where the interest of his constituents, or of the state at large, was in question, he had no right to be magnanimous in the ordinary acceptation of the term. He professed to be governed only by considerations of what he thought was required by general principles of justice and good policy to the interests of the state, and was not inconsistent with the true interests of the district which he in part represented. Such, in his view, was the provision reported by the select committee, and he was willing to adopt it.

It could not be doubted, that although the great public and private benefits to be derived from the future use of the canals, and the revenue expected from them, were in some good degree common to the great body of the people of the state, yet in some respects they would undoubtedly be more particularly beneficial to that portion of the people inhabiting the western and northern sections of it, and they might therefore, reasonably be expected to contribute something more than their equal share, or at least to hazard something more towards refunding the sums advanced for their construction. It was in that view, that the $250,000 tax on lands adjacent to them, was originally contemplated; that however had been suspended, and he had no doubt would be entirely abandoned, because it had been, and ever would be, found impracticable to be executed with any tolerable equality, and so expensive in its collection, as to render it not worth the cost of effecting it.

The legislature had, however, laid a small duty upon salt manufactured in the western district, and the canal commissioners had established a rate of tolls upon all articles passing on the canals. This duty, and these tolls, it was conceded on all hands, were extremely small and moderate in their amount, and no one now complained of them. It might, however, be more for the immediate and supposed interest of that portion of the inhabitants, who consumed that salt, and who transported their commodities on the canals, to have both these impo-itions either essentially reduced, or wholly abolished. No one contended now, that such a wish was a reasonable one, or would venture to advocate it. But it was a question touching the local interests of large bodies of people; the temptation to regard only those interests was a strong one, and the subject was one on which they were always liable to be excited and agitated by designing and ambitious men. It was a spirit, which, whenever awakened, could not be resisted, even by those more considerate amongst them who thought it unwise. In all future struggles of parties, it was to be feared if this question was left open, that rival factions would ever resort to it in every election, for the purpose of gaining partizans to their standard, and every candidate for a popular election, must stand pledged to the repeal of the salt tax, and the canal tolls, to ensure his success, and thus, not only the district, but the state, would be brought in perpetual agitation; for he was yet to learn that there was any project so profligate that some faction could not be found who were willing to force it into their service, when it could serve a temporary or local object. We had already sufficient materials for that purpose, and those who were willing to spend their lives in tending the fires of faction, or in quelling them, were welcome to the employment. It was his wish to remove them so far as might be from their reach. He would put it to gentlemen, who with himself

represented that section of the country, whether if this proposition of paying these duties and tolls, at their present low rate, as the condition of having the canals constructed and completed, had been originally offered to them and to their constituents, they would not, one and all, have at once and cheerfully closed with it, as a most fair and advantageous bargain on their part. Most certainly no one would have hesitated. What, then, we should gladly have done originally, he was willing now to comply with, trusting to the moderation and good sense of those people for his justification. It has been from the enlarged and liberal views of the state at large, that they have been furnished with this great avenue to the ocean, and he was willing to meet these views with a corresponding spirit of justice and good faith, on the part of those who unquestionably would derive from it some advantages peculiar to themselves. Whether he should, in this course, stand singular and alone, he knew not. It was sufficient for him, that he complied with what was his own sense of justice and good feeling towards every portion of the people of this state, and he would not, in this view accede to the amendment proposed to the section by the gentleman from Erie.

MR. KING remarked, that it seemed to be supposed that a jealousy existed is the southern and eastern parts of the state, greater than the occasion would justify. He would advert to a case that he thought in point. The treaties with France, Holland, and other foreign powers, during the revolutionary war, and before the adoption of the constitution, contained provisions to secure the repayment of monies borrowed, not only of pledged faith, but such as made the obligation on the territory the land of the states. And these treaties, with such provisions, were declared to be not merely contracts, but the supreme law of

the land.

CHANCELLOR KENT was also opposed to the amendment of the gentleman from Erie, and adverted to the recent constitution of Connecticut, in which the charter of Yale College, the school fund, and pecuniary obligations, were laid under a renewed, constitutional pledge. We were now about to change our constitution from the beginning to the end. Would it, then, be expedient, or wise, to shrink from a measure to give stability to public credit, which it was our interest and glory to support? The furtherance of the canal must depend upon future loans, and would money-holders hereafter trust the state, when it was found that they would not, by a solemn constitutional act, confirm the pledges already given? Would it not create a distrust that would be extremely injurious? Better would it have been that the question had never been agitated, than agitated and rejected. To leave it to the legislature under these circumstances, would be injurious to that public credit, which, like the delicacy of female reputation, could be maintained and assured by a substantial verdict in its favour. The legislature is a fluctuating body. It rises and falls like the mercury in a thermometer, and if this amendment should be adopted, public credit would, in his opinion, sink fifty per cent. It would be like referring to a mortgagor the power of diminishing the number of acres included in a mortgage. He agreed with the gentleman from Saratoga, that there was a common interest to the various parts of the state, which it was the duty of every friend of his country solicitously to preserve and foster.

MR. NELSON replied-he said he regretted with the honourable gentleman from Albany, (Mr. Kent,) that this subject had ever been brought into discussion in this Convention: and if the consequences were to follow from a rejection of this part of the section, which he predicted, (a fall of our credit fifty per cent.) he (Mr. Nelson) felt no part of the responsibility. He found the sec tion in the report, and he felt bound by every principle to resist its adoption. In his conscience he could not give a vote which would transmit to posterity the record of sectional jealousies, of a want of confidence of one part of the state in the other. He was willing, as it regarded his rights or interests in this community, to trust the legislature on subjects exclusively of legislation, but if he professed the same feelings toward the people of the south and the east which they evinced toward the west, he certainly should think it desirable to have the salt tax fixed in the constitution beyond which the legislature could not go, lest they might hereafter be disposed to increase it unreasonably,