for payment, arose from the division of
political power which existed under the old confederation. A new
arrangement of the system had taken place, and a power over the
resources of the nation was conferred on the general government. With
the funds, the debt also ought to be assumed. This investigation of
its origin demonstrated that the assumption was not the creation of a
new debt, but the reacknowledgment of liability for an old one, the
payment of which had devolved on those members of the system, who, at
the time, were alone capable of paying it. And thence was inferred,
not only the justice of the measure, but a complete refutation of the
arguments drawn from the constitution. If, in point of fact, the debt
was in its origin continental, and had been transferred to the states
for greater facility of payment, there could be no constitutional
objection to restoring its original and real character.

The great powers of war, of taxation, and of borrowing money, which
were vested in congress to pay the debts, and provide for the common
defence and general welfare of the United States, comprised that in
question. There could be no more doubt of their right to charge
themselves with the payment of a debt contracted in the past war, than
to borrow money for the prosecution of a future war. The impolicy of
leaving the public creditors to receive payment from different sources
was also strongly pressed; and the jealousy which would exist between
the creditors of the union and of the states, was considered as a
powerful argument in favour of giving them one common interest. This
jealousy, it was feared, might be carried so far, as even to create an
opposition to the laws of the union.

If the states should provide for their creditors, the same sum of
money must be collected from the people, as would be required if the
debt should be assumed; and it would probably be collected in a manner
more burdensome, than if one uniform system should be established. If
all should not make such provision, it would be unjust to leave the
soldier of one state unpaid, while the services of the man who fought
by his side were amply compensated; and, after having assumed the
funds, it would dishonour the general government to permit a creditor
for services rendered, or property advanced for the continent, to
remain unsatisfied, because his claim had been transferred to the
state, at a time when the state alone possessed the means of payment.