epresentatives, in the
most unqualified terms, declared opinions in favour of systematic and
effectual arrangements for discharging the public debt. But the
subsequent proceedings of the legislature did not fulfil the
expectations excited by this auspicious commencement of the session.

At an early day, in a committee of the whole house on the President's
speech, Mr. Fitzsimmons moved "that measures for the reduction of so
much of the public debt as the United States have a right to redeem,
ought to be adopted: and that the secretary of the treasury be
directed to report a plan for that purpose."

This motion was objected to by Mr. Madison as being premature. The
state of the finances, he thought, was not sufficiently understood to
authorize the adoption of the measure it contemplated. The debate
however soon took a different direction. That part of the resolution
which proposed a reference to the secretary of the treasury was
particularly opposed; and an ardent discussion ensued, in which,
without much essential variation, the arguments which had before been
urged on the same subject were again employed. After a vehement
contest, the motion to amend the resolution by striking out the
proposed reference was overruled, and it was carried in its original
form.

{1793}

In obedience to this order, the secretary made a report, in which he
proposed a plan for the annual redemption of that portion of the debt,
the payment of which was warranted by the contract between the United
States and their creditors. But the expenses of the Indian war
rendering it, in his opinion, unsafe to rest absolutely on the
existing revenue, he proposed to extend the internal taxes to pleasure
horses, or pleasure carriages, as the legislature might deem most
eligible. The consideration of this report was deferred on various
pretexts; and a motion was made to reduce the military establishment.
The debate on this subject was peculiarly earnest; and, in its
progress, the mode of conducting the Indian war, the relative merits
and expensiveness of militia and of regular troops, and the danger to
liberty from standing armies, were elaborately discussed. It was not
until the fourth of January that the motion was rejected. While that
question remained undecided, the report of the secretary was
unavoidably postponed, because, on its determination would depend, in
the opinion of many, the necessity of additional taxes. It would seem
not improbable tha