| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: History of Taxation in Rhode Island to the year 1790
Author: Gardner, Henry B.
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "History of Taxation in Rhode Island to the year 1790" ***
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)
History of Taxation
in
Rhode Island
to the year 1790.
By
Henry B. Gardner.
[Illustration: A dissertation presented to the Board of University
Studies of the Johns Hopkins University for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy. 1890.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contents.
Introduction Page 1
Taxation in Rhode Island 1636-1689 4
The law and administration 16
Taxation 1689-1710 25
The law and administration 32
Miscellaneous revenues 37
Period of paper money 1710-1751 38
Financial history 1751-1790 46
The law of taxation since 1710 63
Colonial and state valuations 69
Customs and excise duties 82
Tonnage duties 89
Notes 91
Introduction.
That method of raising revenue for the support of government which we
understand by taxation marks a well advanced stage of economic life and
is of comparatively recent origin among Germanic peoples. It was unknown
while our English ancestors lived upon the continent of Europe and for
many centuries after they had settled in their new home Society, and, as
a consequence, government had not as yet become differentiated. Some of
the most important duties, such as the defence of the kingdom, the care
of the bridges and forts, were performed by personal service on the part
of the people. Other duties incumbent upon the modern state, those which
require the greatest expenditure, had not arisen. The private and public
revenues of king were not as yet distinguished. The revenue of his
private estates afforded him a considerable income and, in addition, he
enjoyed the usufruct of the folkland. The growth of the feudal system
gave rise to various other sources of income, and besides these there
were payments for special privileges such as markets. The king also
enjoyed rights such as that of carriage and purveyance, for example.
Taxation as we conceive it formed no part of the system. "Only in a
condition of the deepest degradation, under Athelstan the Unready, could
the national assembly be induced to levy a tribute upon the country to
buy off the horde of Danish pirates."[1] Taxation developed rapidly
after the Norman conquest, but as late as the reign of James I out of a
total revenue of about £450,000, £180,000 came from dues on feudal
tenures, and the crown lands, rented at much below their real value,
yielded £32,000.[2]
Feudal dues remained an important source of revenue until the time of
Charles II. All through the early period "the taxes voted were 'aids'
and 'subsidies'; something to help the king eke out his income, as it
were. Systematic taxation as a right--nay, as a duty owed by the citizen
to the State--was an idea entertained with the utmost reluctance."[3]
Even after national taxation had become established the local bodies
continued to depend on personal service (or payments in kind) to fulfil
their military, police, or judicial functions. It was the apportionment
among individuals of fines incurred by the various local divisions for
the neglect of these duties which first gave rise to the county rate,
the hundred rate, and the tithing rate or town levy. From the Tudor
legislation of the Sixteenth and early Seventeenth centuries local
taxation received a definite form and character. The poor law of 43
Elizabeth which established the parish poor rate became the basis of the
system. To this rate all others tended to conform.[4] In early New
England the conditions were much the same in regard to taxation as in
early England. The functions of government were few and simple and often
easiest fulfilled by personal service on the part of the citizens. This
was the case with respect to the maintenance of the roads, and with
military service. The army was the folk under arms. The duties of public
officers, whether of town or colony, could not have been burdensome and
in many cases acceptance of office was looked upon as a duty to be
performed without, or with small, recompense, refusal being accompanied
by a fine. A considerable portion of public services such as those of
the executive officers of the courts (and even of the judicial officers)
were naturally recompensed by fees. Pauperism the great burden of the
older country was hardly possible where land was abundant and labor
scarce.
What has been said or New England in general applies with added force to
Rhode Island, for here the political body concerned itself as a rule
with neither religion nor education.[5] Taxation was regarded for a long
time not as the principal means for meeting ordinary expenditures but as
something irregular and supplementary.
Taxation in Rhode Island, 1636-1689.
_The towns before the Union._
Unlike Massachusetts the towns in Rhode Island remained the supreme
authority under the king for some years before any central government
was established by charter.[6] The first delegated government
established in Providence was in 1640.[7] It was of the simplest nature.
Five men were to be elected quarterly, who, subject to the control of
the town meeting, were to have the disposal of lands and of the "townes
stocke." Disputes between citizens were to be settled by arbitrators
appointed either by the parties to the dispute, or by the five
"disposers," payment for their time spent to be made by the "faultive"
party.
Provision was also made for a clerk who was to receive 4d. for each
cause that came to the town for trial and 12d. for each deed prepared.
All the inhabitants were to join in the pursuit of a fugitive from
justice.
The "townes stocke" was probably derived from fines and payments for
land by the new comers,[8] as there is no mention of taxation. At the
time of the union of the towns in 1647 the delegates from Providence to
the general court, which was to organize the colonial government, were
instructed to secure to the town the reservation of certain rights in
the management of their own affairs, but neither in these instructions
nor in the charter of very full powers afterwards granted to the town is
there any direct reference to taxation. In Portsmouth and Newport the
delegated power was in the hands of a judge and elders. These towns
probably depended on much the same sources of revenue as did Providence;
fines, fees, and payments for land.[9] The political development however
was more rapid on the island than on the mainland and we early find in
Portsmouth traces of taxation as well as of comparative advancement in
financial affairs.[10] The records of the first year of the Newport
settlement show that their financial transactions were of importance and
that certain officers, such as the secretary and sergeant, received
considerable payments from the town.[11] There is no record of the
amount charged for land, nor any mention of taxes, though it is not
improbable that they existed in some form, as the settlers in their
first compact engage "to bear equal charges answerable to our strength
and estates in common."[12] In 1640 Newport and Portsmouth came together
under a common government, each town retaining however its own
organization, and the control of its own affairs. The general officers
were a governor, a deputy governor, four assistants, two treasurers, two
constables, a secretary, and a sergeant. The magistrates (governor,
deputy governor, and assistants) fulfilled judicial as well as executive
functions. The only reference to the payment of officers is a provision
in 1641 that the secretary should have 3s. per day for his attendance
upon the various courts. In the following year this salary is taken away
and it is ordered that both the secretary and the sergeant be paid by
fees.[13]
The common expenses were met by drafts on the town treasurers. The
financial transactions of the united towns were considerable in
amount,[14] and there are several special taxes of interest. It was
ordered in 1640 that the treasury of each town be always supplied with
two barrels of gunpowder and with bullets and match. Every man who
killed a deer outside of his own property was required to bring in one
half to the treasury under penalty of forty shillings. Thus the town
derived a revenue from the use of the public domains. In 1642 a bounty
of five pounds was offered on wolves, to pay which it was provided that
a rate should be levied on every man according to his cattle;[15] the
idea of a direct relation between the tax and the service rendered.
Bounties of this kind must have been one of the principal sources of
expense to the early settlers. On wolves they were sometimes as high as
£5, at other times not more than 30s., while the rate on foxes was 6s.
8d.
The above seems to be substantially all that remains of the financial
records of the early towns. We find in them the conditions already
noted; few needs, abundance of land, for sharing which they could demand
a payment of all new comers, payment by fees or, if a tax was necessary,
perhaps by a tax on a particular class, as in the case of the bounty on
wolves. Fines, too, probably formed a not inconsiderable source of
revenue, for the home of religious freedom seems to have been to some
extent the home of those who desired freedom from the law as well. When
a general tax for the common good was levied the "estate and strength"
of each must have been a matter of common knowledge impossible of
concealment. It should be noted also that neither at this time nor much
later under the charter government was the business of the treasury
managed with that exactness which we find today. Receipts were very
often far behind expenses and bills were frequently allowed to remain
unpaid until the money happened to be in the treasury.
The four towns first organized under a common government in 1647 by
virtue of what is known as the Patent, procured through the efforts of
Roger Williams in March 1643-4. Under this government the colony
remained, with the exception of an interruption lasting from the spring
of 1651 to August 1654,[16] until it reorganized under the charter of
1663 which remained the fundamental law of the colony and state for one
hundred and eighty years.
The general officers under the Patent were a president and four
assistants, a general recorder, a treasurer, and a general sergeant.
There was also a committee composed of six representatives from each
town.[17] A general attorney and a solicitor were added in 1650.[18]
Under the charter of 1663 the president was replaced by a governor and
deputy governor, the number of assistants was increased to ten, and,
instead of the committee of six from each town, provision was made for
six deputies from Newport, four each from Providence, Portsmouth, and
Warwick, and two each from all other towns that might come into
existence. The other general officers remained the same as before. Under
both governments the magistrates (president, or governor and deputy
governor, and assistants) performed judicial functions.[19]
Public service was considered as a duty the fulfilment of which was
enforced by law[20] while payment, except where the method of fees was
available, was either not given at all or was but daily wages for the
time actually employed in the service. Payment for service in the
general assembly or the court of trials did not exceed three shillings a
day, with a much heavier fine for non-attendance.[21] In addition to
this a law of 1679 provided that diet and lodging should be furnished
those in attendance, the expense to be met out of the fines and
forfeitures coming into the general treasury.
The services of the recorder, sergeant, and general attorney were
compensated by fees, though the first two seem also to have had daily
wages for their time employed, and their payment was among the chief
sources of expense at this early period.[22] The general treasurer
enjoyed a percentage, sometimes as high as ten per cent, on the amount
of his transactions.[23]
The care of the highways and the poor was given over to the towns.[24]
It is evident that the expenses of such a government could not have been
great.
So small were the financial operations during the earlier years that the
general treasurer "returned his accompte into the courte for the year
1649, that he (had) received nothing as Treasurer and therefore have
nothing in his hande,"[25] and Gregory Dexter, town clerk of Providence,
could write to Sir Henry Vane "Sir we have not known what an excise
means. We have almost forgotten what tythes are; yea, or taxes, either
to church or commonweale."[26]. In fact for many years fines and
forfeitures seem to have been the chief reliance for defraying ordinary
general expenses and they continued to form a principal element of the
receipts until the end of the century.[27]. Taxation however could not
be entirely avoided. It was necessary to place the colony in a position
capable of defence and in 1650 each town was ordered to have in its
magazine a certain quantity of arms and ammunition, the amount assigned
to each town to be equally laid upon the inhabitants of the council
thereof "according to each man's strength and estate."[28] Taxes were
also levied to pay for powder and shot sent, over from England.[29]
Prisons were necessary and in 1655 the towns were ordered to build two
prisons, two cages, and two pairs of stocks, one of each on the mainland
and one on the island at a total cost of £135.[30] Later court houses
and a state house were required, but on the whole taxation to meet
ordinary expenses remained almost ludicrously small until long after
Rhode Island had become a state. The exercise of the taxing power was
reserved for special occasions. The most important of these was war;
next came the support of an agent in England. Wars which required the
employment of a paid soldiery did not begin until the end of the
Seventeenth century; agents in England to look after colonial interests
were a necessity from the very beginning of the colonies and lasted
until the colonies became states. Particularly was this the case in
Rhode Island, small in population and territory, its jurisdiction
attacked on every side by the claims of more powerful neighbors,[31]
with a charter containing grants of such unusual freedom that it was a
constant target for those opposed to colonial self-government. One of
the acts of the first general assembly under the Patent in 1647 was to
assess upon the towns a tax of £100 to pay Roger Williams for his
exertions in procuring that document more than three years before.[32]
Williams in company with John Clarke again went to England to secure the
repeal of Coddington's commission. The former returned on the
accomplishment of his mission but Clarke remained and cared for the
interests of the colony, and it was in connection with his efforts to
secure the charter of 1663 that taxation on any considerable scale
began. The following table will show the taxes levied from 1662 to the
fall of the Andros government in the spring of 1689. Those taxes marked
with a star were levied under the Andros régime.
_Date of _Amount._ _Purpose._ _Payment may be
Ass'm'nt._ made in._
[33]June 1662 £288 "in silver Agent. "beefe, porke
pay" pease, and wheat,
at such prices as
it then goeth to
the merchants as
moneye pay;"
[34]Oct. 1662 £106 Agent. "goods" to be
priced by men
chosen for the
purpose.
Oct. 1663. £100 "in current Agent
bills."
[35]Oct. 1664. £600 Agent and others wheat, peas,
to whom the pork, horses,
colony is cattle, or any
indebted; sort of
provisions
"according to the
usual rate that
it doth pass at
amongst us".
[36]June, 1670. £300 "in pay Agent. Seems to pork, peas,
currant of this have been wheat, Indian
Collony" diverted to corn, oats, wool,
general purposes. butter or such
other pay as the
General treasurer
may accept.
[37]Oct. 1673. A farthing in the "payment of the See general tax
pound. collonys now law p.
knowne debts."
[38]Nov. 1678. £300 sterling. paying the money, pork,
colony's debts. beef, peas,
Indian corn,
barley, barley
malt, sheeps'
wool or butter at
stated prices.
[39]July, 1679 £60 sterling. to repay money or pay
disbursements in equivalent.
England on the
colony's account.
[40]May, 1680. £100 payment of the
colony's debts
and supplying the
treasury.
[41]Oct. 1684. £160 "in or as to discharge
New England colony's debts.
money."
x[42]Jan. 1686-7. A penny in the general expenses
pound; poll tax of the Andros
1s., 8d. government.
x Aug. 1687. A penny in the General expenses
pound; poll tax of the Andros
1s. 8d. government.
x Dec. 1687. £160. Building two money, wool,
court houses, butter, Indian
repairing the corn, rye or pork
prison and paying at stated prices.
the debts of the
province.
x March, 1687-8. £53-6s. 8d. Bounties on same as last.
wolves.
x [43]Aug. 1688. A penny in the general expenses
pound; poll tax of the Andros
1s. 8d. government.
The requirements of the militia service, which at this time supplied the
whole military power of the colony, should also be taken into
consideration. Militia systems had been established in the towns before
their union under one government. The law of the island towns appointed
eight training days a year for each town with two general musters. A
fine of five shillings was imposed for non-appearance, and all men
remaining on the island for twenty days were liable to the service.[44]
The first assembly under the Patent enacted substantially this same law
for the whole colony[45] and it remained essentially unchanged
throughout the period of which we are treating. The limits of age were
fixed at sixteen and sixty years. The only exemption from service were
on account of "age, monage, sickness, lameness, or publique barringe of
office at that time in the commonwealth."[46] In 1665, the number of
training days was reduced to six and the fine for non-attendance was
gradually lowered to two shillings. Those who were able seem to have
been required to provide themselves with arms and ammunition, but in
case of inability they might be furnished by the town council by means
of rates or from the proceeds of military fines.[47] The military
requirement acted to a certain extent as a poll tax, but the relations
of the colony with the surrounding Indians was for the most part
friendly; the need of strict military discipline does not seem to have
been felt and various references in the laws themselves tend to show
that military regulations were not strictly observed unless under the
influence of some pressing emergency when special laws requiring their
enforcement were passed; so that the military system seems in general to
have been but little of a burden.
It is evident that on the whole taxation daring this period was light.
The nominal amount of taxes of all kinds levied between 1647 and 1689
was not much over £3600 or about £84 a year. Nearly £1100 of this amount
was levied between June 1662 and October 1664 to meet the expenses of
procuring the charter. It was levied for the most part in "current pay"
and the sterling value, probably, did not exceed £600. The collection
also was extended over several years. Such taxation appears to us
extremely light and even though we make, as is necessary, a large
allowance for the difference in economic conditions then and now, the
burden does not appear excessive,[48] while, if we look at the remaining
years, taxation is almost insignificant;[49] it amounted on the average
to but a few cents per capita each year. In fact it was altogether too
light to meet expenses. The colony seems always to have been in debt. In
September 1673 the debts due from the treasury exceeded the debts due to
it by £71 9s. 2d.[50] Five years later the colony was indebted for £437
3s. 10d.[51] In 1684 the Assembly affirm that the existence of the
government is endangered for the want of funds in the treasury.[52] In
several instances money to meet public expenses was raised by
contribution. In other cases the necessary amounts were advanced by
individuals, to be repaid when the money should come into the
treasury.[53] Though, judged by amount, taxation at this period was
unimportant, yet it is here that we find the beginnings of a system
which in theory at least endures at the present time. We turn therefore
to a consideration of _the law and administration of taxation_.
Neither in the Patent nor in the Charter is there any specific grant of
the power to tax;[54] it seems to have been regarded as implied in the
grant of government, and was always exercised by the highest legislative
authority, under the Patent at first by the body of freemen assembled in
general court, and later by the court of commissioners, under the
charter by the general assembly consisting of the deputies and
magistrates, at first sitting as one body and later as two distinct
houses.[55] The legislature apportioned the tax among the separate towns
and required each town to collect and pay into the colony treasury its
quota by the time specified in the act ordering the tax, the towns
employing their own administrative machinery for the purpose.[56]
Perhaps the system is best summed up in a law passed in 1655. "It is
ordered, that ye raisinge of Generall Taxes shall be ordered by ye
Generall Court of Commissioners, as they shall see cause from time to
time as to ye sumes, and how they shall be proportioned on each Towne;
as alsoe, who in each Towne shall have power to make ye rates, and who
are to give forth warrants for ye gatheringe of them; as alsoe in case
of any refusinge to pay, to order assistance to him or them that are
authorized to give warrants, or to gather ye rates as need shall
require."[57] In the case of the tax levied for the payment of Roger
Williams it was ordered in 1650 "that the councill of ech Towne be
enjoyned forthwith to proportion Mr. Williams that debt and other summes
apoynted thereto, according to every mans strength and state;"[58] and
for a while the town council seems to have acted as assessors. Just when
the duty of assessment began to be assigned to separate officers we do
not know, probably very early.[59] Collectors did not come until well
into the next century, their functions being exercised by the town
constable or sergeant.[60] During these early years custom rather than
law seems to have been the regulating power, and it doubtless left much
to be desired. An attempt to remedy these shortcomings was made in 1673
when what may fairly be called the first tax law was passed.[61] It
throws much light on existing conditions. The preamble recites "the
great dissatisfaction and irregularity that hath been by makeinge rates
or raising a common stock for public Charges in the Collony in general
or for any perticuler towne, and the great faileableness to accomplish
it, and great delaies in performance," and affirms that public charges
"should be born according to equity in estate strength."[62] The law
then provides that where a rate is levied by the colony or a town every
one shall "make a true valluation of theire estate and strength, every
thinge that is any estate to them be vallued, which they are not rated
for to another place; and when for a pertickular towne rate, what they
are not rated to another towne." Each person is to pay "to the Treasury
to whome it doth belong" a certain amount upon the pound of valuation as
the assembly may order. Payment may be made in "anything that is
rateable, and it shall not be refused at the price as by two indifferent
men vallued."[63] If any do not rate themselves "the Generall Assembly
may appoint men to gess at their estate, and rate them as they should
have done themselves, and according to double the proportion for
forbearance."[64] "If the Assembly judge any have undervallued their
estates, such shall be required to give in to the Treasurer a true forme
of an inventory of all their estate and strength in pertickular, and
give in writeinge what proportion of estate and strength in pertickular
he guesseth tenn of his neighbours, nameinge them tn pertickular, hath
in estate and strength to his estate and strength." If they do not
comply they are to be rated as those who have not rated themselves at
all; "or if it be proved that there is more due from any than they have
rated themselves, they are to pay double as much therefor (and for the
forbearance), as for it they should have rated themselves." These latter
provisions of the law clearly show the fact which would render it
possible to successfully carry our such a system at that time. Each man
could know the property of his neighbor almost as well as his own
property and it was not for his interest to bear any burden which should
properly fall upon another.
As a matter of fact taxes were seldom levied at so much on the
pound,[65] but a definite amount was ordered, to be apportioned among
the rate payers. This law provides for assessors only in case
individuals neglect to rate themselves, and makes no mention of
collectors. The custom, however as has been said was for the towns to
appoint assessors whenever a tax was to be levied and to entrust its
collection to the constables or sergeants. There were however many
exceptions.
The central government was comparatively weak. Towns very often paid no
attention to the orders of the assembly and it became necessary to
resort to special means to assess and collect the tax. Town machinery
was overridden. The magistrates were empowered to call town meetings to
assess the rate[66] or the assembly appointed a committee for the
purpose. The general or colony sergeant was required to collect the tax
after the assessment had been made.[67] The troubles in connection with
the collection of rates seem to have culminated in the spring of 1672,
when what is known as the "sedition act" was passed.[68] This act after
reciting the dangers arising from the opposition to the collection of
rates provides that "if any person or persons in any town or place
within this jurisdiction, shall at any time more especially in any town
meeting or other publique assembly of people, appear by word or act, in
opposition to such rates and impositions," made by the assembly or in
opposition to any act of the assembly, made in accordance with the
charter, such person shall be "proceeded against as for high contempt
and sedition," and on conviction shall suffer at the discretion of the
justices, "corporall punishment by whipping, not exceeding thirty
stripes, or imprisonment in the House of Correction, not exceeding
twelve months; or else a fine or mulct, not exceeding twenty pounds."
This act was passed in April. In the following month the annual election
occurred. Not a single deputy was reelected, and the same was true of
the governor and six assistants.[69] Political revolution was never more
complete. The new assembly repealed every act of its predecessor. So
strong was the reaction that in the following November a limitation was
placed upon the assembly's power of taxation, by the provision "that noe
tax nor rate from henceforth shall be made, layd or levied on the
inhabitants of this Collony without the consent of the Deputys present
pertaining to the whole Collony, as there must be a major part of the
Assistants (by the Charter), nor any way bringe the Collony in debt by
any meanes." The assembly does not seem to have recovered its former
powers until 1679.[70]
With the establishment of the Andros government the assembly
disappeared. The right of taxation throughout his whole jurisdiction
belonged to Andros and his council; for local purposes it seems to have
been delegated to a court of nine justices which succeeded to the powers
of both the Assembly and the Court of Trials.[71] So much an examination
of legislative enactments shows us. We are fortunately enabled to fill
out the picture to some extent from other sources. In Jan. 1678-9 the
freemen of Providence took action in regard to their quota of the colony
tax assessed in the preceding October. A committee of four was chosen
"to draw aside a Little space of time, to consider togather of the
suitablist prices, Which is meet to be sett on (ya Esteemed) Rateable
Estate of ye Inhabitants of this Towne, x x x for to be a helpe &
preparation to ye Lieviers." The rates of valuation agreed upon were as
follows:
"Meaddow Land: One acar Improved, to be Vallued at 04-00-00
planting Land: One Acar Improved to be Vallued at 03-00-00
Vakant Land; & unimproved: £ Acar to be Vallued at 00-03-00
An ox 04-00-00
4 or five yeare old steers 03-10-00
Cowes & three yeare old Cattle, To be Vallued at 03-00-00
two yeare old Cattle, To be Vallued at 01-15-00
Yearleings-Cattle--Each of whom--To be at 01-00-00
three yeares old Horses, & horse kind--To be Vallued at 02-00-00
two yeare old horse, & horse kinde To be Vallued at 01-10-00
hoggs, or swine, Each of them above a yeare old 00-15-00
sheepe--above a yeare old--To be Vallued at 00-04-00"
"Ye Rate-makers" however "are not soe strictly tyed x x to ye
Instructions of ye above sayd Committee, but yt they have a Libberty to
Vary therefrom, as in theire discrescesion shall seeme meet Unto them, x
x x they having the sayd Instructions as a Line for some guide of theire
Judgement therein." Five men were then chosen to assess the rate.[72] At
the meeting of the following March, it is ordered that notices be set up
in public places stating that the rate is to be levied and requiring all
inhabitants within fourteen days to bring in to the rate makers an
account of "The quantity of their Land & Meadows Layd out to them,
Improved & unimproved, As alsoe what Cattle of any Sort they have,
otherwise none can justly be offended, if ye Raters only use what
information they can get." When the rate makers have made up their lists
of what each man is to pay they are to post them in public places and
each tax payer is then to bring to the treasurer, at his dwelling, the
sum for which he is rated. The assessors completed their lists in July.
The town clerk was ordered to prepare a copy of the list and deliver it
to the town constables who should collect the rate. If any refused to
pay application was to be made to a Justice of the Peace who should
grant a warrant of distraint against the property of the defective
person.
Among the manuscripts in the Rhode Island Historical Societies Cabinet
in Providence are preserved several hundred of the lists of rateable
estates returned to the assessors by individuals during the period of
which we are now treating.
The following is "The Account of ye Rateable Estate of Jon. Whipple of
providence:
First Sixe Cowes, and one heifer; not 3 yeares old.
Secondly 2 Oxen
3dly 3 Steeres of 3 yeares old
4ly one heifer; 2 yeares old
5ly 3 of one yeares old, one a steere; ye 2 heifers
6ly 3 horses
7ly one mare and colt, beside 3 more if not stolen or alive or made
bobtailes
8ly one house lott within Fence
9ly 2 shaires in ye Great meadown where I mowe 4 lods of hay
10ly 4 Swine
11ly one yeare old horse colts"
John Whipple seems to have been blessed with more than the average
amount of wealth in personal estate, but this list as do all the others
clearly shows the character of the property which existed at the
time.[73] But little if any property was owned beyond the limits of the
town. Everything was tangible and could be concealed neither from the
neighbors nor the assessors. It was not difficult to fix on a standard
of valuation which should apply uniformly and fairly to all property
owners. The method of taxation adopted was clearly the most suitable,
indeed the only one suitable at all, for a community of farmers, where
land was abundant, and where trade had not developed but each family
produced for its own consumption.
Taxation 1689-1710.
With the restoration of the government in 1690, after the fall of
Andros, Rhode Island enters upon a new period of her history, a period
marked within by a stronger central authority and a more settled and
orderly government.[74]
In 1695, the governor was granted a salary of £10 a year, the deputy
governor £6 and the assistants £4 each. All these officers had
previously been exempted from taxation.[75] Without the period was one
of successive wars against the French and Spaniards, wars which required
the support of a paid soldiery and, for a colony situated as was Rhode
Island with her great extend of sea coast, the maintenance of strong
defences against hostile ships. The charter was also endangered by the
attacks of the Narragansett proprietors, and later of Bellemont and
Dudley, and this required considerable expenditures to meet the expenses
of the agent in England. The taxes and the purposes for which they were
levied during the remainder of the period of which we are now treating
can be seen in the following table.
_Date of _Amount._ _Purpose._ _Payment may be
Ass'm'nt._ made in_
[76]May 1690 £300 "for the support of wool, butter,
their Majesties' Indian corn, rye
interest against and pork.
the French and
Indian enemies."
July 1695 2d. in the pound. Same as last.
Oct. 1695 1d. in the pound. Agent, and, if
surplus, to pay the
colony's debts.
May 1696 2d. in the pound.
July 1696
Aug. 1698 £800 "pay the Colony's
debts, and putting
monies in bank, for
sending an agent
for England."
Oct. 1699 £600 "for sending agent
for England"
March 1700/1 £400 "current "for paying the
money of this Collony's debts and
Colony" defraying of the
publick Charge."
March 1701/2 £200 "in money" "for the use and
benefit" of the
colony according to
the direction of
the governor and
council.
May 1702 £300 "in money or Same as last. Money, indian corn,
good pay oats, barley, rye.
equivalent."
Feb. 1702/3 £500 £200 for fort £150 money, indian corn,
for jail £150 for barley, wheat, rye,
debts oats, wool.
Jan. 1703/4 £500 "for the support of "money or pay
the government." equivalent,
according to the
Collony's acts
heretofore made."
May 1704 £700 in "money or money, wool, Indian
pay equivalent." corn, barley, oats,
rice, wheat.
Feb. 1704/5 £500 in "current "for defraying the See "Amount."
money of New Collony's debts."
England in pay in
like species as
the last £700
rate."
June 1705 £500, same as last Same as last Same as last.
Aug. 1705 £1000, same as £300 for agent; Same as last.
last remainder not
specified.
May 1706 £700 £400 for fort £100 Same as last.
for magazine, £200
for debts.
July 1706 £300 Same as last.
Feb. 1706/7 £500 £400 for the
expenses of a
cruise, £100 for
debts.
May 1707 £1500
Feb. 1707/8 £500
Aug. 1708 £800 "in money, or £100 for colony Indian corn,
specie answerable house, £100 for barley, rye, oats,
at the usual agent, remainder wool, wheat.
rates." for debts and
general expenses.
March 1708/9 £500 Same as last. Same as last.
May 1709 £1000, same as Same as last.
last.
Aug. 1709 £1000 for debts.
Feb. 1709/10 £1200 same as last.
There were two wars against the French during this period; "King
William's War" from 1689-1697, and "Queen Anne's War" from 1702-1713. In
the first Rhode Island took little part. She sent no men to aid the
other colonies but confined herself to strengthening her own defences
and repelling the French privateers which occasionally appeared in her
waters, particularly off Block Island. The same is true of the early
years of the Second War, although in this case the danger was greater
and really considerable amounts were expended in putting the colony in a
condition of defence, especially in strengthening and supplying the fort
at Newport. A regular garrison was maintained at Block Island. The
colony took part in the expedition against Port Royal in 1707, and in
1709 sent to Boston and maintained for five months two hundred men to
assist in the proposed expedition against Canada which did not take
place. The useless expenditure necessitated by this failure fell heavily
on the colony and when, in the following year, one hundred and
fifty-five men were sent to take part in the expedition against Port
Royal bills of credit were issued to meet the expense.
During the earlier years expenses did not increase much and seem to have
been principally for the completion of the colony house, begun under
Andros, and for the expedition to repel the French from Block
Island.[77] Beginning with 1695 there is a change. The payment of public
officers becomes a considerable charge. The expenses of the Agent
increase. Then comes the war expenditure, at first the maintenance of
the fort and the Block Island garrison and then the expeditions against
Canada.[78]
The receipts are now almost entirely from taxes, other sources having
become comparatively insignificant with the increasing revenue. The
burden of taxation showed a constant tendency to increase. The average
annual tax from July 1695 to February 1709-10 was about £1000, from
August 1698 to the same date over £1200, from January 1703-4 nearly
£1900, from May 1706 £2300, from February 1707-8 £2500, and during the
last year £3700 was raised. A census of the colony in December 1708
showed a total population of 7181 of whom 482 were servants, black and
white.[79] This would show a great increase in the per capita taxation
over the earlier period. During the last year the per capita rate was
over half a pound. The taxes collected during this single year amounted
to as much or more than all the taxes collected during the first forty
years of the colonial government. There is no doubt that the burden was
a heavy one and, following the example of others, the colony sought
relief in issues of paper money. With the adoption of this new source of
revenue colonial taxation practically ceased and was revived only under
the pressure of another and greater war thirty-five years later.
The law and administration.
With higher taxes the necessity of a system of taxation just and at the
same time capable of strict enforcement, was more strongly felt. We
consequently find from the very beginning of the period a great increase
of legislation on the subject, so that by January 1703-4 there was
placed on the statute book a body of law which contains the substance of
our law today, and to which little was added, until, within recent
years, the rapidly growing complexity of our industrial life has
necessitated[80] more careful and detailed enactments.
In the case of the very first tax after the Restoration Warwick
complained of overrating, and the Assembly finding "that the manner of
rating of towns by guess is no suitable nor certain rule, but may prove
very prejudicial; x x determine that for the future, all rates that
shall be made in the Collony, shall be made according to so much on the
pound as the estates of persons are valued at."[81]
The three succeeding taxes were, in accordance with the resolution of
1690, percentage taxes and in connection with them we find much
interesting legislation. A committee appointed in 1695 to draw up a plan
of assessment reported as follows, "We therefore propose this way be for
the rateing all lands and meadows and merchants, tradesmen and housings
in this Collony; that every town shall yearly choose two or three able
and honest men, to take the view of each of their inhabitants of their
lands and meadows; and so to judge of the yearly profit at their wisdom
and discretion; and so also of merchants and tradesmen; and to make this
part of the rate according to the yearly profit; or as they, when they
shall have had a more narrow inspection into the lands and meadows,
shall see cause to set by the acre." The report was ordered to stand as
an act by the assembly.[82] Persons who did not bring in an account of
their estate were to be rated at the discretion of the assessors. In
this assessment according to profit, particularly of tradesmen and
merchants, we clearly see the influence of the commerce of the colony,
which was just at this time beginning to develop.[83] Here too we see
the first idea of assessors annually elected.[84] The penny in the pound
rate of this year was levied in accordance with the same act, as was
also the two pence rate of 1696. In 1698 percentage taxation was
abandoned, not to be again revived, and a return was made to the former
custom of assessing a specified sum and apportioning it among the towns.
An attempt however was made in the adoption of the most detailed law
with which we have yet met, to avoid injustice in the assessment. In
each town the assistants or two justices were to appoint two men to take
account of rateable estate and of males between sixteen and sixty years
of age, a return to be made to the assistants or justices, who were to
call a town meeting to choose "three well qualified men" to assess each
person's estate, in accordance with the account returned and the act of
1695, so as to raise the required sum. All male persons between sixteen
and sixty years of age were required to pay a poll tax of one
shilling,[85] Indians, negroes and impotent persons excepted, unless
they were freemen or had set up a trade or calling in the colony.[86]
Any person who should conceal any part of his estate from those
appointed to take account was to forfeit one fourth of the amount
concealed. Finally an account of the rateable estates was to be brought
into the assembly, in order that if any town had been overproportioned
the error might be rectified.[87] Though this act was not a general law
it seems in its administrative features at least with some slight
modifications[88] to have been the basis of the tax system until January
1703-4 when was passed the act which as we have said, is the foundation
of the present law, so far as its administrative features are concerned.
Its provisions were as follows: Each town on its annual election day was
to make choice of "three able, knowing men x x x for Assessors, or
Rate-makers, to stand for the year ensuing, who shall be engaged as all
other town officers; they, or the major part of them, in each town so
chosen, to make and proportion all town rates, and likewise each town's
part of all Collony rates". Collection was to be made by the town
constables who in case of neglect were to be responsible for the sums
entrusted to them for collection.[89] The act was amended from time to
time as occasion required. In May 1704 the provision was introduced
requiring the rate makers before assessing a tax to give ten days notice
to each person to bring in an account of his rateable estate, anyone
failing to do so to have no redress for overrating.
The rate makers were also empowered to administer an oath to all
offering an account of their estates.[90]
The system of percentage taxation having been abandoned by the assembly
that body endeavored to obtain a satisfactory basis for the
apportionment of taxes among the towns by ordering from time to time
that each town should send into the assembly an exact estimate of its
rateable estate. I have been able to find no trace of these early
valuations.[91]
Looking at the period after 1695, there is a plainly marked progress
both in legislation and administration. Before 1695, no well defined
system of taxation had been established by general law, but it was
customary for each act assessing a tax, or the amendments to it, to
contain the rules for assessment and collection. A practically uniform
system doubtless prevailed by custom, but it was not embodied in the
law. After 1695, we meet with general laws upon the subject of taxation
which gradually result in a recognized legal system. When a tax is
ordered reference for the method of assessment and collection is
generally made either to some former tax or to a general law, the latter
being always the case after 1703-4.
The same progress is evident in the administration of the law. During
the first few years great difficulties were often experienced, as in the
earlier period, and it was frequently found necessary to override town
machinery and place the appointment of the assessors and collectors of
the tax in the hands of the officers of the central government.[92] As
that government became more firmly established, however, the towns
yielded more willing obedience and during the later years of which we
are speaking the heavy taxes were collected with great promptness by
means of the ordinary administrative machinery. The cost of assessment
and collection at the time was great amounting to seven or eight per
cent. of the tax collected. In addition to this there was frequently a
loss resulting from the payment of taxes in kind, either because the
articles had to be disposed of at price lower than that at which they
had been received or because of injury suffered while in the
treasury.[93]
Miscellaneous Revenues.
There still remain to be noticed one or two matters which have not
fallen within the foregoing survey.
The first has to do with legislation in regard to traders who cane into
Rhode Island from other colonies, sold their goods and then returned
remaining often but a short time. It was claimed that these traders
carried off much ready money and produce to the detriment of the colony,
at the same time escaping the burdens which fell upon the home trader. A
law of 1698 levied a tax of five shillings on every ten pounds value of
goods sold at retail by any trader who was not admitted an inhabitant of
the colony. The tax on goods at wholesale was twenty shillings on one
hundred pounds. This provision seems to have been aimed at foreign
goods, as grain, provisions, and the produce of neighboring plantations
were excepted from its operation.[94] In 1700 the tax on retailers was
raised to five per cent.[95] and in the following year all merchants
remaining in the colony for a month were made liable to all rates and
duties levied upon inhabitants.[96]
The second has to do with other sources of revenue, in addition to those
already mentioned, enjoyed by the colony, more important for the
principle which they exemplify than for the revenue which they yielded.
In 1707 an act was passed provided for the survey of vacant lands in the
Narragansett country. These lands were sold to settlers and the proceeds
devoted to the Canada expedition.[97]
From the nature of the colony ferries had always been a matter of great
importance. The assembly had occasionally interfered to regulate their
management in the interest of the public, and in 1699 adopted the policy
of leasing the ferries for a term of years on condition of an annual
payment to be made into the general treasury. The receipts were small
but the principle involved was an important one.[98]
Period of Paper Money, 1710-1751.
The history of paper money in Rhode Island has already been treated with
considerable fullness.[99] It does not strictly fall within the scope of
this monograph and will be treated only so far as to give a clear idea
of the financial policy of the colony, an idea necessary to an
understanding of the part played by taxation.
According to the report on the state of the treasury in 1709; the year
of the attempted expedition against Canada, notwithstanding the heavy
taxation, the colony found itself in debt to the amount of
£3830-15s.-4d. To cover this deficit and meet the expenses of succeeding
expeditions £13000 in bills of credit were issued during the years 1710
and 1711. These bills passed equal to silver at eight shillings per
ounce.[100] By this means the colony succeeded in transferring the
balance to the right side of the account.
During the years of peace which followed the peace of Utrecht annual
expenses greatly diminished. Ordinary expenditure was considerably under
one thousand pounds, extraordinary expenditure sometimes added as much
again or even more to the account.[101] With the growth of population,
political and economic development,[102] and the depreciation of the
currency, these sums gradually increased so that in 1731 a report made
to the Board of Trade estimates the ordinary expenditure at two thousand
pounds and the extraordinary at two thousand five hundred pounds. By
1739, when the Spanish war began the total of these two sums had
increased to about six thousand pounds.
Notwithstanding the diminution of expenditure the colonists at the close
of the war in 1713 were loth to take up again the burden or taxation and
for the next forty years the government supported itself almost entirely
by means of bills of credit. The usual method of procedure was this.
Bills of credit were issued and loaned at interest, for a term of years,
to landholders on mortgage security to double the amount of the bills.
These loans were termed "Banks." The following table shows the Banks
issued before the Revolution, the number of years for which they were
loaned, the rate of interest received and the value of the bills at the
time of issue.
_No. _Date._ _Amount._ _Years _Rate of _Value of silver in
of loaned._ Interest._ bills._
Bank._
I 1715 £40,000 13 5 12s. per ounce.
II 1721 40,000 13 5 16s. per ounce.
III 1728 40,000 13 5 18s. per ounce.
IV 1731 60,000 10 5 22s. per ounce.
V 1733 100,000 10 5 25s. per ounce.
VI 1738 100,000 10 5 27s. per ounce.
VII 1740[103] 20,000 10 4 6s. 9d. per ounce.
VIII 1743[104] 40,000 10 4 6s. 9d. per ounce.
IX 1750 25,000 10 5 6s. 9d. per ounce.
At the expiration of the loans interest ceased and repayment was made in
ten equal annual instalments.[105] The amount legally outstanding in
January 1740-1 was £340,000, (sterling value £88074-16s. 10-3/4d.)[106]
the actual amount was doubtless greater, as we know that repayment was
not always promptly made.[107] In addition to the Banks the General
Assembly had from time to time made direct issues of bills of credit.
Before 1739, however, these issues were principally to replace worn and
torn bills and did not increase materially the circulation. According to
a report made in October 1739 the amount issued up to that time
(including everything but the banks) was £117,001-15s. This sum had been
offset by bills burnt to the amount of £105,704-15s. 3d., leaving an
increase of circulation due to these issues of £11296-19s. 9d. Under the
stress of war which now began and continued for several years these
issues were largely increased. According to a report prepared in
February 1749/50, for transmission to the English government, there was
issued from September 1740 to February 1747 £206,000. The committee sums
up its report in regard to these bills as follows: "At divers times,
from the year 1710, to the year 1747, the colony has emitted bills of
credit to the amount of £312300, old tenor; and there hath been called
in and burnt at several times from the year 1728 to 1748, £176,964, 6s.
10d.; and by the last settlement of the general treasurer's account, it
appears that there was then in the public treasury, £24,891 10s. 10d.
from all which it appears that there is now outstanding of the bills
issued to supply the treasury, £110,444 2s. 3d.; the whole of which
outstanding sum was issued in the years 1746 and 1747,and is equal to
£10,040 7s. 5d. sterling."[108]. The amount legally outstanding in bank
money was £390,000 old tenor (£210,000 nominal) sterling value £35,444,
9s. 2d. The increased issues had depreciated the paper money so rapidly
that its relation to sterling was now as 11 to 1. As in 1739, the actual
amount outstanding the legal amount. By the aid of remittances from
England for the reimbursement of war expenditures Massachusetts
succeeding in sinking her paper bills. Rhode Island with much larger
proportional issues failed to follow the same course.
Douglas in 1748 estimated the total amount of bills of all kinds
outstanding at £550,000 old tenor and even this seems to have been an
under rather than over estimate.
In 1751 came the ninth and last bank, of a nominal value of £25,000
equal to £237000 old tenor. The issue of this bank was the last victory
of the paper money party. For many years a strong opposition had been
developing. As early as 1731 a protest against the issue of the fourth
bank, signed by prominent citizens, had been sent to the king. Protests
were also entered against the seventh and eighth banks, and in 1750
another petition against paper money issues signed by seventy two
persons, representing the merchants of Newport, the commercial centre of
the colony, was presented to the king. In 1751 parliament passed an act
which, supported by the growing sentiment in favor of better financial
methods, may be said to mark the downfall of the paper money policy. The
principle provisions of the act were that, after September 29, 1751,
bills of credit could be issued only with the consent of the
home-government, and that provision must be made for calling them in
within two years in the case of issues to meet current expenses, and in
five years in the case of emergencies such as war. The time of the bills
already out was not to be extended, and no bills issued or to be issued
were to be made a legal tender. It seems best to anticipate for a moment
and trace to its end the history of the issues already made. First, as
to the bills issued to supply the treasury. Of those which had been
called in and burnt previous to 1749, £88725 had been sunk by means of
grants made by parliament to reimburse the colonies for the expenses
incurred in King George's War. In 1751 £24280 more wore sunk in like
manner. Between this date and 1785 £17368 were sunk from the proceeds of
taxes leaving outstanding £93688. This sum was called in by a tax for
the exact amount levied in 1769.
Provision for calling in the bank money by repayment of the loans had
been made as we have seen in the acts of issue. The whole amount should
have been repaid by 1767, but instead of this a report made to the
general assembly in May 1770 shows that there was still outstanding
£92615 old tenor value.
The bills continued to depreciate rapidly. In 1763 the following table
was adopted as a standard for the determination of old tenor debts.
£. s. d.
In the year 1751 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 2 16 0
In the year 1752 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 3 00 0
In the year 1753 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 3 10 0
In the year 1754 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 3 15 0
In the year 1755 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 4 05 0
In the year 1756 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 5 05 0
In the year 1757 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 5 15 0
In the year 1758 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 6 00 0
In the year 1759 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 6 00 0
In the year 1760 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 6 00 0
In the year 1761 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 6 10 0
In the year 1762 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 7 00 0
In the year 1763 a Spanish milled dollar was worth 7 00 0
At the same time it was "enacted and declared, that lawful money of this
colony is, and shall hereafter be silver and gold coin; and that nothing
else shall be taken and understood to be lawful money of this Colony."
Old tenor suffered a still further depreciation, until in the tax act of
February 1769 it was ordered that it be received at the rate of $1 for
£8. By act of September 1770, its circulation was forbidden after
January 1, 1771. The rapid depreciation since the issues at the time of
King George's War together with the return of Massachusetts to a specie
currency at the end of the war seems to have been disastrous for Rhode
Island commerce which was mostly with the West Indies. The disturbance
was aggravated by the approaching war, and so numerous did mercantile
failures become that a general insolvency act was passed in 1756.
Financial History 1751-1790.
_Financial History 1751-1775._
During the French and Indian war paper money was issued in large
quantities but provision was made for its redemption in accordance with
the Act of Parliament in 1751, and an earnest attempt was made to meet
the obligations thus incurred.
The period from 1751 to 1775 was really a period of war financiering,
for the debt incurred for war purpose was not extinguished until the
beginning of the Revolution, and we shall treat it as a whole.
The sources of revenue were loans, bills of credit, treasury notes,
grants made by the English government, and taxes.
_Loans._
These were usually advanced by private individuals. Unfortunately the
accounts entered in the colony book by the auditing committees were not
kept in such a manner as to enable us to determine with satisfactory
certainty either the amounts borrowed or the times of repayment. The
difficulty is the greater with regard to the latter point. So far as the
books show the sums borrowed between 1751 and 1775, reduced to sterling,
amounted to about £28,441, of which all but about £4,000 was borrowed
during the six years 1755-1761.
_Bills of Credit._
The history of the bills issued up to the year 1751 we have already
considered. It remains to describe the issues of the present war.
The first of these issues was in 1755 to meet the expenses of the Crown
Point expedition. The bills were of the old tenor denomination,
amounting to £240,000 equal to £13,500 sterling. They were to circulate
two years without interest and then be called in and sunk. The
subsequent issues were all in what were known as lawful money bills.
They were issued at various times from 1756 to 1767, the total amount
being £97,569 equal to £73,360 sterling. All but £6660 were issued on or
before August 1762, £14,000 issued in 1756 were to run for two years and
without interest. The other emissions were for five years with interest
at 5%. The bills were declared equal to silver at 6s. 9d. per ounce.
_Treasury Notes._
These were interest bearing notes issued to meet the bills of credit,
bonds given for money borrowed or other treasury notes as they fell due,
when receipts from other sources did not suffice for redemption. The
practical effect was to work an extension of the debt. As shown by the
treasury reports these notes seem to have been issued for the most part
between the years 1765 and 1775 and amounted to £46,549 lawful money
equal £34,999 sterling. The greater part seem to have been redeemed at
the outbreak of the Revolution.
_Receipts from England._
These were grants made by the English government to reimburse the colony
for expenses incurred in the war. These grants made throughout the
course of the war amounted to about £50,000 sterling and there was
received from the English commanders in this country about £4000 or
£5000 more, making in round numbers £55,000.
_Taxes._
We now come to the source of revenue which concerns us most nearly. A
slight attempt to resume taxation had been made at the time of King
George's war. A tax of £10,000 old tenor (£1677 sterling) had been
ordered in 1744 and another of £5,000 new tenor (£2000 sterling) in
1747/8, but the paper money party was still in the ascendant and it was
not until after the overthrow of that party that the policy of taxation
was seriously resumed in 1754.
The following table will show the taxes levied from that date to the
beginning of the Revolution, together with their sterling values at the
time the tax was ordered.
(o. t. = old tenor. l. m. =
lawful money. The second
column contains the
sterling values.)
1754 £35,000. (o. t.) £2102
1755 70,000. (o. t.) 3710
1756 53,000. (o. t.) 2274
4,000. (l. m.) 3008
1757 100,000. (o. t.) 3917
150,000. (o. t.) 5875
4,000. (l. m.) 3008
1758 6,000. (l. m.) 4512
110,000. (o. t.) 4129
1759 11,000. (l. m.) 8271
1760 15,547. (l. m.) 11689
1761 16,000. (l. m.) 12030
1762 8,000. (l. m.) 6015
1763 12,000. (l. m.) 9023
1764 12,000. (l. m.) 9023
1765 12,469. (l. m.) 9375
1766 6,000. (l. m.) 4511
75,000. (o. t.) 2252
1769 6,000. (l. m.) 4511
93,688. (o. t.) 2638
1770 12,000. (l. m.) 9023
1771 £12,000. (l. m.) £9023
1772 12,000. (l. m.) 9023
1773 4,000. (l. m.) 3008
1774 4,000. (l. m.) 3008
This would give an average annual taxation for the twenty-one years of
£6,950 sterling or $33,777. in our money, equal to about 70 cents per
capita.
Taxation, however, varied greatly at different periods. For the eleven
years 1756-1766 the average annual tax was $43,707., about $1.00 per
capita; for the five years 1757-1761 it was $51,935., equal to $1.18 per
capita. Taxation reached its height in 1760 and 1761 amounting to
$57,637. a year and $1.28 per capita. By 1773 it had fallen off to
$14,619. a year, or a trifle less than 25 cents per capita. An estimate
of the rateable property in 1762 gave a valuation of £26,105,423 old
tenor, equal to about $4,224,178. Using this as a basis the rate of
taxation in 1760 and 1761 would have been about 1.36 per cent. on the
value of rateable property. An estimate of 1769 gave a property
valuation of $7,706,449. (£2111356 lawful money). The rate of taxation
in 1773 and 1774 was only .19 per cent. on this valuation. The average
rate for the whole period seems to have been about one half of one per
cent. By far the greater part of this taxation was for war purposes. The
regular expenses of colonial government do not seem to have exceeded
$7300. (£2000 lawful money) per annum, which towards the end of the
period would amount to not more than 12 cents per capita, or one tenth
of one per cent on valuation.
The above is a general outline of the financial operations of the
period. The indebtedness of the colony at any particular date is
difficult to determine. A committee in 1762 estimated that there were
outstanding bills to the amount of about £53231 sterling. According to a
report of a like committee in 1762 the amount was about £43000. In
addition, however, the colony was considerably in debt for money hired.
Whatever debt there was, however, seems to have been, for the most part,
extinguished in the early years of the Revolution.
Financial History of the Revolution.
With the opening of the Revolution a new debt began to roll up. £60,000
in bills of credit (lawful money) were emitted in 1775 and £80,000 in
the following year. A meeting of commissioners from the New England
states, in Providence, December 1776, recommended that Rhode Island
issue no more bills of credit, except of fractional denominations, but
depend upon loans and taxes. The State complied with the suggestion and
the only other issue of bills, before 1780, was in May 1777, when £4,500
in fractional currency was emitted. These bills of credit, as well as
the continental bills, were declared a legal tender. They seem to have
kept their value fairly well until the beginning of the year 1777, when
a rapid depreciation set in. In accordance with the recommendation of
Congress they were called in by Act of May 1778, and their circulation
forbidden after July first of that year. After this date continental
money, probably, formed the main circulating medium, until depreciation
had gone so far that in 1780 the tender laws were repealed and a return
made to a gold and silver basis. Up to June, 1779, the colony seems to
have borrowed £162,756. In addition there were, all through the war,
issues of certificates in payment of various obligations. It is
impossible even to approximate to their amount. They were in many cases
made receivable for taxes and were redeemed in this way. Taxation was
resumed in March 1777, and vigorously applied, but so heavy were the
burdens which fell upon the State in its weakened condition that in the
summer of 1780 the treasury was empty.
This led to the issue of £20,000 more in bills of credit. This was the
last issue of paper money by the State during the War. A considerable
portion of the debt had been redeemed by taxation. That part of the debt
incurred during the paper money period, which still remained
outstanding, was called in by several Acts of 1782 and scaled down to
the basis of the special value at the time the obligation was incurred,
for which amount the treasurer issued his notes, payable in lawful money
(silver), in from three to six years, bearing interest at six per cent.
The want of accurate accounts leaves us in doubt as to just what was the
effect of this consolidation and reduction. A committee reporting in
October 1783 places the state debt at £123,892-15-11, in addition to
£19,922-2-0 of the state's proportion of the new continental emission
(March 1780) outstanding.
The greater part of this latter sum, however, had never left the
treasury. A report of a committee in March 1787 placed the debt at
£153,047-15-7. In the mean time steps had already been taken for its
extinguishment.
In the years succeeding the war the colony was in a wretched economic
condition. It was exhausted by the heavy financial and other burdens,
the disturbance to industry, and the loss that had resulted from a long
continued and destructive occupation of the commercial centres or the
state by the British, as well as by the presence of the American army
which had to be clothed and fed. Trade was interrupted, a large portion
of the able bodied men had entered the army, and even those who remained
at home were liable to be called upon at any moment for temporary
service, or to have their property taken at an appraised valuation.
Services rendered to the state were paid for only by promises of
constantly decreasing value. As a result of all these causes economic
society was disorganized. In the midst of such conditions the state was
called upon to face a heavy debt. The treasury was completely exhausted
and the people seemed unwilling to submit to further taxation. The
legislature again turned to paper money for relief, and in May 1786
ordered the issue of the tenth bank. The amount was £100,000 and it was
to be loaned, as were the others, on double mortgage security. The rate
of interest was four per cent., and repayment to be completed within
fourteen years. Depreciation was immediate and rapid, but the paper
money party was firmly seated in power and the legislature passed acts
of the most extreme character to enforce the circulation of the bills.
The ordinary legal procedure, including trial by jury, was suspended in
the case of offenders against the paper money laws. These "forcing
acts", as they were called, came to naught, however, as the supreme
court refused to exercise jurisdiction. Balked in their effort to force
the circulation of the bills, the legislature turned to the easier task
of paying off the state debt in the depreciated currency. By a series of
acts, ranging from December 1786 to March 1789, the holders of the state
debt were ordered to bring in their claims and receive payment in the
paper bills, under penalty of forfeiture of the whole amount. As a
result of this threat about one half of the debt seems to have been
presented and paid, the smaller holders as a rule yielding to necessity,
the larger holders standing out in the hope of a more profitable
adjustment. The paper money party was now nearing the end of its power.
An act of October 1789 made the bills of 1786 receivable at fifteen to
one for coin, and authorized those to whom the money had been loaned by
the state to make repayment upon the same basis.
In May 1790 the state entered the Union, and the possibility of such
schemes in the future ceased. Those who had been able to resist the
attempt of the state to pay their claims in a depreciated currency now
reaped the benefit of their foresight. By act of August 4, 1790 Congress
provided for the assumption of $21,500,000. of state debts, of which
$200,000. was allowed to Rhode Island. Seeing the injustice which would
accrue to those who had been compelled to accept their payment in paper
money, the assembly in June 1791 passed an act repealing the various
acts which had declared null and void the securities which had not been
brought in in accordance with the acts of 1786-1789. Where payments had
been made on securities in paper money the treasurer was authorized to
reduce the amount so paid to specie value and deduct it from the face
value of the security, the remainder to be presented with other
securities for subscription to the United States loan. The United States
commissioner, however, refused to receive these certificates, as the law
under which the assumption took place provided that only those notes and
certificates which had been issued prior to January 1, 1790 would be
received. Thus the whole of this assumption enured to the benefit of
those who had not brought in their securities for payment, as ordered by
the state. On the day following the assumption of the state debts, just
referred to, Congress provided for a settlement of accounts between the
United States and the individual states. The latter were to be debited
with all advances made by the general government and credited with all
disbursements made for "the general or particular defence during the
war, and on the evidence thereof according to the principles of general
equity (although such claims may not be sanctioned by the resolves of
Congress, or supported by regular vouchers)." The settlement of these
accounts showed Rhode Island to be a creditor of the United States to
the amount of $299,611. The final settlement between the state and its
creditors is shown in the report of the general treasurer in Feb. 1797.
The whole amount of the debt recognized by the state was $503,594.76.
$419,662.30 of this was paid by the transfer of United States stock in
the possession of the state and $83,932.46 by the issue of 4% state
certificates. This last formed what was known as the registered state
debt. It was added to, from time to time, by the recognition of new
claims for Revolutionary service and was diminished by occasional
purchases by the state at a rate below the par value, but the state was
always loth to recognize its full responsibility for the debt and ended
by practical repudiation.
The above is an outline of the financial history of the state during the
Revolution. We now turn back for a moment to obtain a more detailed idea
of taxation. Perhaps this can best be done, as in the case of the French
and Indian war, by means of a table. (The date given is that of the
passage of the act assessing the tax. The first column contains the
nominal amount of the tax as stated in said act. The second column
contains the nominal amount of the tax actually assessed, certain
deductions being necessary on account of the occupation of portions of
the state by the enemy and for other reasons. The third column contains
the same reduced to specie value, and the fourth column contains the
same expressed in our present dollars. The taxes marked with a star are
for continental purposes)[109].
Date. Nominal Nominal Specie Value in
value in value value dollars.
pounds. assessed. assessed.
March, 16,000 12,658 11,613 42,387.
1777.
Aug. 1777. 32,000 25,316 16,877 61,601.
Dec. 1777. 48,000 37,115 11,973 43,701.
------- --------
147,689.
Feb. 1778. 32,000 24,365 6,962 25,411.
June 1778. 32,000 24,289 6,072 22,163.
Oct. 1778. 32,000 After 6,000 21,900.
------- --------
69,474.
Feb. 1779. 60,000 June, 6,912 25,229.
x Feb. 90,000 1778, 10,369 37,847.
1779.
June 1779. 60,000 the 4,471 16,319.
x June 225,000 first 16,766 61,196.
1779.
x Dec. 120,000 and 4,628 16,892
1779.
------- --------
157,483.
x Feb. 180,000 second 5,418 19,776.
1780.
x May 1780. 180,000 columns 3,913 14,282
May 1780. 180,000 are the 3,913 14,282.
July 1780. 10,000 same. 10,000 36,500.
July 1780. 400,000 5,797 21,159
Nov. 1780. 1,000,000 13,514 49,326.
Nov. 1780. 16,000 16,000 58,400.
------- --------
213,725.
May, 1781. 20,000 20,000 73,000
May, 1781. 6,000 6,000 21,900
------- --------
94,900
x Jan. 6,000 6,000 21,900
1782.
Jan. 1782. 12,000 12,000 43,800
x Feb. 6,000 6,000 21,900
1782.
x June 12,000 12,000 43,800
1782.
------- --------
131,400.
June 1783. 20,000 20,000 73,000
------- --------
73,000.
June 1784. 20,000 20,000 73,000
------- --------
73,000
Aug. 1785. 20,000 20,000 73,000
------- --------
73,000.
------- --------
June 1786. 20,000 13,333 48,665.
------- --------
48,665
March 1787. 20,000 3,534 12,899
Sept. 1787. 30,000 5,000 18,250.
------- --------
31,149.
June 1788. 30,000 4,000 14,600
------- --------
14,600
March 1789. 20,000 1,667 6,085
------- --------
6,085.
In addition to these money taxes there were various other burdens which
took the form of more or less arbitrary contributions. Enactments were
early passed regulating the prices of all articles, and, in case they
could not be otherwise procured, authorizing their seizure at these
stated prices to meet various expenditures. It became customary, when
troops were to be raised, to require each town to raise a certain
number, often a cause of considerable expense, and, as the war went on
and paper money and loans failed as sources of state revenue, it was
common to hold each town responsible for a certain quantity of clothing
or provisions. Payment of some kind was generally provided for, but,
owing to the wretched financial conditions of the time, these
requirements must have operated to a certain extent as a tax.
The long continued presence of the enemy necessitated in addition to the
maintenance of an army as large or larger than the states proportion of
the continental levies, an almost constant militia service which, though
nominally paid for, must have been a severe burden and interfered
seriously with industry. Again, in any attempt to estimate the burden of
taxation during the Revolution, we must take into consideration not only
the impositions above mentioned, which partake more or less of the
character of taxation itself, but also the general condition of the
colony. The British held possession of the island towns from December,
1776, to October, 1779. These towns were in great part deserted by the
sympathizers with the American cause, who, having lost almost all their
property, became a burden upon the rest of the state. All the towns
situated upon the sea coast or upon the shore of the bay were subject to
the incursions of the enemy and were kept in a constant state of alarm,
while on one occasion at least arrangements were made for the evacuation
of Providence. Commerce was practically destroyed and economic life
apparently to a great extent disorganized, giving rise to wide spread
suffering from poverty.
If we assume the population of the taxable portion of the state for the
years 1777-8-9, to be 46,000, the per capita rate of taxation for the
period was about $2.71 per annum, and the rate for the years 1780-1-2,
on the basis of the population in 1782, was $2.80. The highest rate
during the period was in 1780, when it reached $4.08. With the close of
the war taxation diminished. In 1783-4-5, it was about $1.35 per capita,
and after the issue of paper money in 1786, it gradually sank until in
1789, it amounted to only about 9 cents.
Estimating the rateable property in this state, exclusive of the towns
in possession of the British, at $10,165,048, the rate of taxation for
the three years 1777-1779, would have been 1.22 per cent per annum.
On a ratable basis if $10,903,312, the rate in the years 1780-82, was
1.34 per cent, the highest rate during the period was 1.96 per cent in
1780. On the basis of the valuation computed in 1783, the rate for the
years 1783-1785, was only .6 per cent and had fallen to .05 per cent in
1789.
When we remember that this taxation was for both state and continental
purposes, it does not seem excessive, judged by the figures of today.
Taking into consideration however the general and special economic
conditions of the period, it is safe to say that it was a heavy
burden.[110] Any comparison with recent times must necessarily be
unsatisfactory, for finance was an art but little developed in the
United States one hundred years ago, and the burdens of the Revolution
were felt much more in the shape of a constantly depreciating currency,
forced seizures of property, service without recompense, unpaid debts,
and general economic disturbance, than in excessive taxation.
The law of taxation since 1710.
The history of the law of taxation shows us no change of principle but
only a further development of detail where experience had shown[111]
existing provisions inadequate. Additional measures against foreign
traders were passed. In 1738 each town was directed to choose "three
discreet and prudent Persons" to assess such foreign traders according
to their trade. In case of non-payment the delinquent might be
distrained upon or in case there was not sufficient visible property he
might be committed to jail.[112]
Considerable progress was made in developing the law of assessment. In
1744 when taxation was resumed, a law was passed which declared in
detail the various kinds of rateable property and the values at which
they were to be assessed. It is of so much value, both as affording a
comparison with the like enactments of the earlier period and as giving
an example of the acts in accordance with which colony valuations were
taken, that it seems best to print it in full.[113]
"An Act ascertaining what Estate is Rateable, and for proportioning the
same in Value.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of this Colony, and by the
Authority thereof, it is Enacted, That the following Estates shall be
deemed Rateable in all Publick Colony Rates and Taxes, therein made and
levied, and shall be included and considered in the Proportioning the
same, and that in the following Manner, and according to the Specifick
Value they are hereafter fixed at, viz:
All Neat Cattle of Four Years old and upwards, shall be valued at Ten
Pounds per Head.
All Neat Cattle from Two Years old to Four Years old, shall be valued at
Five Pounds per Head; and Neat Cattle that are under Two Years old, are
not to be considered.
All Horse Kind to be rated in the like Manner, as to their Age and
Value.
All Sheep and Goats of One Year old and upwards, shall be valued at
Fifteen Shillings per Head; and if younger, not to be valued.
All Swine of One Year old and upwards, shall be valued at Thirty
Shillings per Head; but not to be considered before.
All Slaves for Life, that are between Sixteen and Fifty Years of Age,
shall be set at the Price of Eighty Pounds; those under Sixteen, or
above Fifty, not to be rated.
All deck'd Vessels that are in Port, shall be set at Five Pounds per
Ton; and those not deck'd, at Three Pounds per Ton.
All Trading Stock shall be set at Half the real Value thereof; to which
is to be added, what Estate every Man hath, either in Money, Bonds, or
other Estate that lies concealed, to be considered as other personal
Estate, which the Rate makers shall have Power to require, and take an
Account of as visible Estate.
All Lands, Houses, Mills, Wharffs and other real Estates, shall be
valued at the Rate of Ten Years, and so considered in the Assessment.
All Males from Sixteen Years old and upwards, shall be stated at One
Shilling per Head, for every Thousand Pound Rate assessed by the Colony;
and in Proportion for a greater or lesser Sum: In which Assessment upon
Poles, shall be included all Servants for Years, of the Age aforesaid.
And be it Enacted by the Authority aforesaid, That the Assessors in all
and every Rate, levied as aforesaid, shall consider all Persons who make
Profit by their Faculties, and shall rate them accordingly."[114]
In 1747 the poll tax was reduced to nine pence per one thousand pounds
of tax levied. As a matter of fact the usual amount of the poll tax, as
determined in the various acts ordering the assessment of taxes, was six
pence per one thousand pounds.[115]
The digest of 1767,[116] defines somewhat more minutely than before the
procedure to be followed by assessors. They were directed to make
separate lists, first of the estates, the valuations of which had been
handed in by the owners, second of the estates estimated by the
assessors, and third of the number of polls.
The amount to be raised on polls was then to be deducted from the total
tax and the remainder was to be apportioned among the rateable estates.
Even in the case of those who made return of this property, the power of
making the final estimate remained with the assessors, subject to an
appeal to the next general sessions of the peace for the county. If it
appeared that a true list had been handed in the tax payer might recover
from the town treasury. The appeal was not to interfere with the process
of collection. By act of 1769 all lands or other real estate granted or
purchased for religious uses or for[117] schools were exempted from
taxation.
It would appear that in the case of leased estates taxes had been
assessed on the owner. This had rendered collection difficult, and in
1784 it was provided that in the future the tax should be assessed on
the occupant who was to be liable in his real and personal property. If
this was not sufficient the real estate occupied was liable.
By the same act assessors were required to distinguish between real and
personal estate, and assign a separate column to each in their rate
lists.[118]
The law in regard to collection also underwent considerable development.
It was about the middle of the century that collectors began to be
regularly elected as town officers.[119] A law of February 1755 provided
that if a person rated in one town removed to another town without
paying his rate, the collector of the town where he was rated might
follow him and collect the tax.[120] The difficulty of collecting taxes
on the lands of non-residents led to laws which provided that the land
itself might be sold for taxes.[121] The general treasurer was first
given the power to call special courts for the prosecution of delinquent
collectors,[122] and later was authorized to bring actions directly
against the town treasurer[123], who in return might recover from
delinquent collectors and their bondsmen. In 1781 the real estate of
collectors and their sureties was declared liable for the satisfaction
of all judgements secured against them.[124] Warrants for collection
were declared to be in force until the tax was collected.[125].
Collectors were empowered to call before them any one who they had
reason to believe possessed property of any person who had been rated,
but who had left the colony, and compel him to pay the tax of the absent
person. In case the person summoned failed to appear and make
declaration, he himself was liable to distraint for the amount of the
tax.[126] Personal property seized by distraint might be removed, for
sale, to any part of the colony.[127]
There were several other general laws of less importance[128] and,
besides these, there were certain provisions which were re-enacted with
each tax assessment. In this way the towns were required to pay all
charges and fees for collection. Interest was charged against the towns
in arrears. It was generally provided also that the towns might appoint
new assessors for the assessment of each colonial tax, and, in some
cases at least, it was customary.
Colonial and State Valuations.
The law of taxation as it appears in general acts has to do principally
with questions of administration. What we might call the principle of
the tax system was not as a rule embodied in the general law. It was the
growth of custom and its existence was assumed in legislative acts. That
the state might apportion the taxes among the towns with some degree of
justice, it was necessary, however, that it should obtain information in
regard to the value of the property existing within its borders. Thus,
from time to time, general estimates were taken, and in the acts
ordering these estimates we find a more detailed statement of the
methods and principles to be followed, together with certain departures
from the usual custom which reflect the various phases of economic life
in the period to which they refer.
Just what was the basis of apportionment among the towns when taxation
was resumed in 1744, we do not know. By act of June 1747 the assessors
in each town were required to take an exact account of the rateable
estate of all inhabitants on the basis of the act of 1744, and made
returns to the next session of the assembly, for use in the
apportionment of taxes. A similar valuation was ordered in 1754, and
again in 1757. Return was generally made, but they showed only the total
valuation of each town as estimated by the assessors, and the assembly
made use of no means of verification or revision. Protests against
apportionment were frequent. In June 1761 another act was passed for
marking a general valuation of the colony. The assessors of each town
with two other persons appointed by the assembly did the work. Detailed
rules were laid down for their guidance. They were to take account of
all "Male Polls of Sixteen years old and upwards, distinguishing such as
are exempt from Rates, and of all Rateable Estates lying within said
Towns, by whom occupied, and what each Person's Real Estate may rent for
by the year, particularly mentioning Land," and the various kinds of
structures thereon. The estimate was also to distinguish all negro,
Indian, or mulatto servants for life from fourteen to forty-five years
of age, the number of tons of vessels upwards of ten tons burthen, each
person's whole stock in trade including vessels under ten tons, all
goods, merchandize, and money owned by any person or in his hands by
"factorage," all wrought plate and money at interest "which any person
hath, more than he pays interest for," and all horses and other cattle.
The committees were ordered to distinguish the various "Improvements of
Land", and to specify in their lists the number of acres of pasture,
tillage, orchards, salt marsh, and sedge, fresh meadows, and English
mowing land respectively, also the stock each pasture was ordinarily
capable of feeding, and what quantity of produce the land yielded on the
average. Persons handing in lists of their estates might on oath declare
the amount of debts which they owed and deduct the same from their
personal estates. The person in possession of an estate was obliged to
give an account of the same, and when no one was in possession the
committee was to estimate.
The committees were empowered to administer oaths, and if any inhabitant
refused to hand in an account of his estate, he was to be "doomed" by
the committee and forfeit £30. A committee was appointed to receive the
reports of the various town committees, to compare and revise them and
thus make a general estimate.
In February, 1762, this committee reported such an estimate. It was
adopted by the assembly and declared to be the basis of future
apportionments among the towns. The report contained the following
estimates: acres of woodland 247,685; value of woodland £4,613,778;
amount of live stock £2,835,007; money and trading stock £8,455,428;
rents £1,458,748; polls 8,285. On the basis of these estimates the
committee reported the following standard for apportionment:
One third part of the woodland £1,537,926-0-0
Total amount of live stock and negroes 2,835,007-0-0
One half the amount of trading stock 4,227,514-0-0
Total amount of rents at twelve years purchase 17,504,976-0-0
----------------
26,105,423.[129]
A protest on the part of the country towns signed by twenty members was
immediately presented. The grounds of complaint were that the committee
had reduced trading stock one half when the act for taking the estimate
had already "provided for large deductions," and secondly that twelve
years purchase was too high an estimate for land values. Although the
estimate of 1762 had been accepted as the legal basis of apportionment,
departures were made from it which gave use to more or less weighty
protests. In the case of the tax assessed in October, 1765, there was a
protest signed by fifteen members which declared the estimate of 1762 to
be the only legal rule of apportionment, and that the present departure
from it was "altogether arbitrary, unequal and oppressive to particular
towns, nor founded on any real knowledge of the circumstances of the
people taxes." Providence, Scituate and Cumberland refused to pay the
tax. Another protest by the representatives of the same towns was made
against the apportionment of the tax in the succeeding year, when the
apportionment was declared to be "a high act of arbitrary power and
despotism and an exercise of such authority as is utterly inconsistent
with a British Constitution." The assembly proceeded against the towns
and recovered judgment, but did not venture to put it into execution and
finally agreed that the refractory towns should pay their portion of the
last two taxes on the basis of the estimate of 1762. The result of this
dispute was the general estimate of 1769. The act for taking the
estimate was passed in June, 1767. A committee of five (one from each
county) were directed to proceed into each town and make the valuations.
The principles laid down for the guidance of the committee were much the
same as those employed in 1762. Trading stock however was to be
estimated at its full value, except vessels at sea and their cargoes
which were to be estimated at two thirds of their real value. Negro and
other slaves and improved lands were to be estimated at their full
value, the value of the lands to be reckoned at twenty years rental.
Houses and buildings of all kinds, including those used for
manufacturing purposes, were to be estimated at fifteen years rental,
horses and other farming stock at full value. Debts might be deducted
from the personal estate if the "Committee shall think the same best".
The committee were given power to examine on oath and to send for papers
and records. If any person refused to testify or give an account of his
estate, he was to be taxed two fold in the next colony rate. No colony
tax was to be levied until the valuation was made and approved, when it
was to be the standard for the apportionment of taxes until a new
estimate was taken. A protest was entered signed by eight members
asserting that twenty years purchase was an over valuation of land,
while fifteen years purchase was no higher than, if indeed it was so
high as, the real value of houses and buildings, and that unimproved
land as it yielded no profit, should not be taxed. Land holders, it was
claimed, would bear a much larger share of the public burdens than in
justice they ought in proportion to the merchants and traders.
The report of the committee as at first presented was subjected to
careful re-examination and correction. The final result was reported and
accepted in February, 1769, and the estimate was declared to be "the Law
and Rule for future Taxation." The estimate as adopted contained the
following items:
Acres of woodland 241,685-3/4
Value of woodland £236,946-5-6
Rent at 20 and 15 years 1,356,830-16
Sum total of ratables of each town 517,578-9-1
-------------
Total 2,111,356-0-7
Polls 8,952.
Protests against apportionments under the estimate were few. From
October, 1774, to March, 1777, no tax was levied. When it was found
necessary to resume taxation a committee was appointed to consider the
changes which had occurred in each town since 1769, and agree upon a new
basis of apportionment. The committee completed its work in one day, and
made a report containing an estimate which was accepted as a temporary
standard. The total valuation of the new estimate was only a few pounds
greater than that of eight years before. The island towns, then in
possession of the enemy, were relieved at the expense of the main land,
the most important change being the removal of £100,000 from the
valuation of Newport and the placing of it on Providence, increasing the
valuation of the latter town by nearly eighty per cent. Providence, in
its desire to further the resumption of taxation, accepted this large
addition, but only on condition that it should not become a precedent.
The General Assembly however showed no desire to take a new estimate and
continued to apportion taxes in accordance with the estimate of March,
1777.
Providence, beginning to feel the burdens of the war in the stoppage of
its commerce and the demands of military service, protested and refused
to pay its tax as it had done ten years before. The assembly reduced the
valuation of Providence first by £25,000, then by £50,000, and in
October, 1778, passed an act for taking a new estimate. As in 1769, a
committee of five was appointed and was directed to proceed into each
town and take account of ratable estates and all male polls of
twenty-one years and upwards, except ministers of the gospel and
officers and soldiers in the army and naval service. The principles on
which the estimate was to be taken varied but little from those laid
down for the estimate of 1769. All the property enumerated was to be
appraised at its full value, "whether the said rateable Property be
removed without the limits of the state of not." The committee as before
were empowered, if they thought best, to deduct debts from personal
estate. No report was made until July, 1780. The committee had visited
each town "and with great care, and as much precision as possible, have
endeavored to obtain an exact account of the real value of this state."
The report was accepted and the estimate declared to be the legal basis
of apportionment. The total valuation was £2,778,145-10-0. In September
several towns complained that the estimate was erroneous, and a
committee was appointed to revise it. This committee reported in
November having increased the total valuation about £10,000, and made
considerable alterations in the relative portions of the towns. This
report was submitted to still another revision, the final report however
being presented at the same session. The total remained unchanged and
the changes made in proportions assigned to the towns were, for the most
part, not important. This last report gives merely the total valuations
of the towns, but the earlier report of the November session comprises
the following headings:
Number of acres 518,112-3/4
Price per acre £2-5s. to £70-10s-6d.
Value of real estate 2,788,145-10s.
In none of these estimates were the island towns included. A valuation
of these towns, in accordance with the act of 1778, was ordered in June,
1783, and completed in October of the same year. It showed a total of
£502,227-5-0 which, added to the valuation of the mainland towns in
1780, gave a total valuation for the state of £3,290,372-15-0. This was
the last general estimate made before the adoption of the constitution
of the United States.
The first point which we notice in these valuations is the prominent
part played by the poll tax. On the basis of the estimate of 1762, and a
poll tax of six pence per one thousand pounds, the poll tax supplied
20.7 per cent of all receipts from taxes. In 1769, the proportion was
22.2 per cent. This proportion increased of course with the growth of
population, and by 1774, must have amounted to 24 per cent, but the
diminution of the taxable population during the war brought it down
again to 22 per cent in 1780. As to the proportions in which personal
and real estate entered into the valuation, personal estate formed about
one third of the total in 1762, and about one fourth in 1769, while,
owing to the destruction of personal property during the war, it had
sunk to about one-eighth in 1780. In all these estimates there is a
tendency to favor personalty, as represented in the growing commercial
interests, at the expense of the proprietors of land. In 1762, money and
trading stock was valued at only one half of its true value, and in
1769, land was valued at twenty years rental which must certainly have
been a high valuation.
A comparison of the proportions in which the various towns contributed
to the various taxes is instructive. The figures following refer to the
estimate of 1769. The whole number of towns was twenty-eight. Eleven
towns paid a larger proportion of the total property tax than of the
total poll tax, showing they contained more than their proportionate
share of wealth. As a whole they comprised the territory which borders
on Narragansett Bay, and which had been long settled. Together they
contained 40.32 per cent of the rateable polls, and 56.10 per cent of
the property in the colony. The most important towns among them were
Newport, which contained 12.44 per cent of the polls, and 15.6 per cent
of the property; Providence which contained 5.06 per cent of the polls
and 5.94 per cent of the property, and South Kingstown which contained
4.78 per cent of the polls and 9.3 per cent of the property. As a rule
these were also the towns which contained the largest proportions of
personal property.
Of the property valued in Newport 47.4 per cent was personal, in
Providence 51 per cent. Newport contained 30 per cent of all the
personal property in the colony, Providence 12.4 per cent (i.e. the two
commercial towns with 17.5 per cent of the polls contained 42.4 per cent
of the personal property) and South Kingstown 6.2 per cent. Eleven towns
out of the twenty-eight contained 77 per cent of the personalty. These
same towns contained 49.5 per cent of the polls.
The gain in valuation from £2,111,295-10-7 to £3,290,372-15, between
1769 and 1780-1783, was entirely on real estate, the personal property
valuation remaining practically stationary, owing to the destruction
caused by the war.
There is a falling off in the share of taxes paid by the commercial
towns in proportion to their population. In 1782, Providence contained
8.23 per cent of the population, but it paid only 6.98 per cent of the
taxes. Newport's per centage of population had fallen to 10.56 per cent
and the per centage of taxes to 7.81. On the other hand, the country
towns had gained proportionately. Taking Providence county, exclusive of
the town of Providence, we find that in 1769, it contained 26.64 per
cent of the polls and 19.2 per cent of the property, in 1782 it
contained 25.27 per cent of the population and 27 per cent of the
property. There was but little change in the relative positions of the
other counties, Kings County made a slight gain, and the other counties
suffered a slight loss, with the exception of Newport County. Here the
loss of the Island towns was great. In 1769, they contained 19.09 per
cent of the polls and 26.7 per cent of the property while in 1783 they
had but about 16 per cent of the population and 15.2 per cent of the
property.
Customs and Excise Duties.
Among the acts of the first assembly under the Patent in 1647, occurs
the following:
"It is ordered that the Dutch, French or other alliants, or any
Englishman inhabitating among them, shall pay the like customs and
duties, as we do among them for all such goods as shall be imported for
the English, except beaver."
This act was probably of little practical importance as the trade of the
colony during the seventeenth century was very small. In 1655, an excise
duty of five shillings was imposed on every anchor of liquors and
quarter cask of wine, and three years later a like customs duty was
added. The revenue from both taxes at first went to the towns, but in
1674 it was transferred to the colony, as "the whole excise seems almost
all lost by neglect." The collection of the tax was to be farmed out.
Whether the tax was more productive than under town government we do not
know. It was repealed in 1686. Both customs and excise duties were
introduced by Andros, but disappeared with his government. In 1696,
however, the customs duties on liquors was reimposed by the colony, and
molasses was added to the list.[130] In 1707 slaves were added to the
dutiable articles, at £3 per head. About twenty or thirty were annually
imported from the Barbadoes, and their value was from £30 to £40 a
piece. The income from this source must have been of considerable
importance at the period. In 1715 the revenue from this tax in the naval
officers' hands was £289-17-3. In the same year the law was amended so
as to cover negroes brought in from the neighboring colonies. The act
seems to have remained in force until May, 1732, when it was repealed
under instructions from the English government. There seems to have been
no further imposition of customs or excise duties on the part of the
colony until the period of the Revolution. The state, as we have seen,
was left in an exhausted condition at the close of the war. The people
were unwilling to continue the payment of taxes and were behind on those
already levied. The annual interest on the debt was considerable.
A committee, appointed to devise means for supplying the treasury,
reported November, 1782, recommending the imposition of customs and
excise taxes. In February of the following year, an act was passed in
accordance with this recommendation to take effect on the tenth of April
following. Both customs and excise duties were imposed. Collectors do
not seem to been appointed until May, and in June the act was repealed
so that it was of little practical importance. At the same session,
however, its place was supplied by an act laying a duty of two per cent
ad valorem "on the Value, and at the Time and place of landing of all
Goods which shall be imported into this State being of the Growth or
Manufacture of any foreign State," the revenue, as before, to be devoted
to the payment of interest on the public debt. The act was to take
effect on July 1.
The law was enforced with severe penalties. No imported goods were to be
landed without permit obtained, on penalty of forfeiture of vessel and
cargo. No dutiable goods imported by land could be removed from the town
into which they were imported, or sold or consumed in that town without
a permit from the collector of impost, under penalty of forfeiture or a
fine equal to the value of the goods. In June, 1784, the duty was raised
to two and one half per cent. It was at this period that manufacturing
industries began to take root in Rhode Island, and, as a natural result,
we find evidence of the growth of the protective principle in tariff
legislation.
In February of the following year a committee was appointed "to draught
an act laying an additional duty upon hats, shoes, boots and such other
articles of foreign manufacture as may be manufactured within this
State." In May an act was passed discriminating against British vessels.
It provided for an additional duty of 7 1/2 per cent on goods imported
in any vessel owned in whole or in part by British subjects.
The result of the work of the committee appointed in February is seen in
an act of June, 1785, entitled 'An Act for laying additional Duties on
certain enumerated Articles, and for encouraging the Manufactory thereof
within this State, and the United States of America." The act is quite
extensive including the following articles:
25 %
Ready made garments, canes, brush handles, warming pan handles, mop
sticks, tailors' press and notch boards, house bells, toys.
20 %
Scythes, hoes, leather goods.
12 %
Paper, blank books, pewter ware, tin ware.
10 %
Tools for the use of block makers, chaise makers, tanners, curriers,
caulkers, shoe makers and husbandmen, (sickles, plane irons and saws
excepted) muffs, tippets, ermine, candles, soap, manufactured tobacco,
goldsmiths, silversmiths and jewellers ware. Instrument and cabinet
makers work, frame chairs, porter, beer.
5 %
Cordage, twine.
Special Duties.
Axes and adzes (per doz.) 6s.-20s.
Cards (per doz. boxes) 12s.
Women's shoes (per pair) 1s. 1s. 6d.
Cheese 3d. per lb.
Wrought gold 6s. per ounce.
Clocks and gold watches 18s.
Carriages £ 3, 15s. - £ 15.
Loaf sugar (3d. per lb.)
Hats 1s. - 6d. - 3s.
Iron hollow ware 3s. per cwt.
Dressed and tanned leather 3d. per lb.
Wrought silver 1s. per ounce.
Silver watches 6s.
Though the purpose of the act was protective, it is evident that in the
case of many of the articles enumerated, the duty was entirely a revenue
tax. In March, 1786, steps were taken towards laying an excise duty. A
committee was appointed to draw up a bill for the purpose. The committee
reported at the same session and an elaborate excise act was passed,
which was to go into effect on May 16; but at the session in that month
the act was suspended until the next session, when a committee of
revision was appointed. There is no farther mention of any legislation
in regard to the excise until December, when another excise law was
passed to go into effect on May 15, 1787, and remain in force for three
years. Neither of these acts seem to have been generally enforced. No
collectors were appointed under the act of March. Under the December act
collectors were appointed in May, 1787, but there is no record of any
subsequent appointments.
When government under the United States constitution went into
operation, in 1789, it became impossible for Rhode Island to pursue an
independent policy in regard to customs duties, and the General Assembly
at the May session passed a law providing that the same duties, payable
in the same money, be collected in Rhode Island as should be ordered by
Congress for the United States. In September the assembly supplemented
this provision by enacting a law similar to that which had been passed
by Congress. Goods imported from the United States and from North
Carolina were exempt from duty. In May, 1790, the state adopted the
constitution and the power to levy impost duties ceased.
The want of method in keeping accounts at the time renders it impossible
to state exactly the amount of revenue received under the acts imposing
import duties. I have found however nearly complete returns of the
duties collected in the counties of Providence and Newport, which
contained the principal posts of entry.
County of Providence.
(Includes receipts from October 1, 1783)
Total nominal receipts £21,533-14-7 3/4
Receipts in paper money of 1786, 11,464-4-1
---------------
Receipts in specie 10,069-10-6 3/4
Specie value of paper money receipts 1,550-14-6 3/4
---------------
11,620-5-1 1/2
Value in present dollars $42,414.
County of Newport.
(Includes receipts from July, 1783, May, 1789, and from Sept.
1789)
Total nominal receipts July, 1783, May, 1789, 18,900-1-8 3/4
Receipts in paper money of 1786, 10,131-12-8 3/4
---------------
Receipts in specie 8,768-1-0
Specie value of paper money receipts 2,181-10-4 1/2
---------------
Total specie value of receipts 10,949-11-4 1/2
Value in present dollars $39,966.
Receipts from September, 1789, 3,202.
---------------
Total 43,168.
Providence County 42,414.
---------------
Total for both counties 85,582.
Such figures, of course, are not exact, and it has been impossible to
find more than fragmentary returns from other counties. Such counties
were, however, comparatively unimportant. It will probably not be far
from the truth if we place the total receipts under the customs acts for
the period of between six and seven years, when they were in force, at
something over $90,000 or about $14,000 a year. The interest on the
public debt must have amounted to between $30,000 and $40,000 per annum,
so that the revenue from customs duties fell far short of satisfying the
purpose for which it was imposed.
Tonnage Duties.
Tonnage duties were imposed as early as 1690, and continued until Rhode
Island entered the union. They were first levied for the support of the
fort and were payable in either money or powder. About the middle of the
eighteenth century a light house was built and additional tonnage duties
were imposed for its support. The amounts varied from time to time,
according to the needs of the fort or light house, and there was
discrimination in favor of vessels engaged in home trade. In 1767, a
time of peace, the duty imposed for the support of the fort was 2 S., or
1 lb. of powder per ton for all vessels above ten tons, not owned by
inhabitants of the colony. The "light money" was 4 1/2d. per ton for
foreign vessels and 3s. for each clearing for coasters.
Notes.
Footnote 1:
Gneist, Hist. of the Eng. Const., Vol. 1, p. 34.
Footnote 2:
Wilson, The National Budget, p. 10:
In the year ending March 31, 1886, the net receipts from domains,
forests, &c., were only £380,000, out of a total revenue of over
£89,000,000, but it is interesting to notice that even now by the
_ordinary revenue_ is understood "the old hereditary property of the
king, the original property of the state, which belongs to the king
independently of any vote of Parliament," while by _extraordinary
revenue_ is understood "the income derived from direct taxation,
customs, and excises granted by vote of Parliament," Gneist, Hist.
Eng. Const. II, 346-7.
Footnote 3:
Wilson p. 7:
The earliest taxation was on land only. Taxation of personal property
was introduced by the Saladin Tithe in 1188. It was the introduction
of a poll tax which led to the Wat Tyler rebellion of 1381. The first
permanent tax was the hearth money tax imposed in 1663. Much the
greater part of the taxes are now permanent.
Footnote 4:
In early times the fines were apportioned among those whose neglect
had caused the fine i.e. the freeholders with freeholdings, including
houses and profitable rights, as the basis of assessment. (Gneist,
Hist. Eng. Const. I, 375, 376.) The system now becomes the household
(whether freehold or not) "according to the scale of the visible
profitable property in the parish." (Ib. II, 212.) The act itself
reads that the overseers of the poor shall have power to raise the
necessary funds "by Taxation of every inhabitant, Parson, Vicar and
other, and of every occupier of Lands, Houses, Tithes impropriate,
Propriations of Tithes, Coal Mines or saleable Underwoods in the said
Parish, in such competent Sum and Sums of Money as they shall think
fit."
Footnote 5:
No tax was ever levied in support of religion. The colony as a whole
seems to have neglected education. In 1640, however, Robert Lenthall,
school teacher and minister, was granted 104 acres of land by Newport,
and 100 acres was appropriated for a school "for encouragement of the
poorer sort." Arnold's Hist. of R.I., Vol. 1, p. 145. Providence also
later made some provisions for education.
Footnote 6:
Providence, Portsmouth, Newport and Warwick, founded between 1636 and
1642, were perfectly independent with full powers of self government
until united under what is known as the _Patent_ in 1647. This
independent character of the towns is brought out in W. E. Foster's
_Town Government in Rhode Island_--John Hopkins University Studies,
Fourth Series.
Footnote 7:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 27-31.
Footnote 8:
Among the entries under the first day of which we have record is an
order for the appointment of a treasurer for the "expending of the
Towne's stock." (R.I. Col. Recs. I, 13) Some months later it is
provided that any one more than a quarter of an hour late at a town
meeting shall be fined 1s. 6d. (ib. p. 15) An entry under the second
year shows that payments had been made for lands received by new
comers, and like payments are ordered to be made by future comers, but
the amounts are illegible. (Staples' Annals of Prov., p. 23) In 1661,
Roger Williams in speaking of the year 1638, says it was agreed that
every person admitted to "injoying landes" should pay 30s. to the
common stock (R.I. Col. Recs. I, 23) And in the articles of government
in 1640, it is provided that every one received as a townsman shall
make the same payment (ib. 30) The same provision is included in the
plan for a new settlement proposed by Roger Williams (ib. 40)
Footnote 9:
At Portsmouth the charge was 2s. per acre (R.I. Col. Recs. I, 56)
Footnote 10:
In 1638, a fence was ordered to be built "the charge to be borne
proportionally to every mans allottment." (repealed). In the same year
two treasurers are chosen; it is ordered that the highways be repaired
and that a prison be built both to be paid for out of the treasury. A
land subsidy for building a mill is granted and in 1643 a town watch
is ordered to be kept every night, also to be paid for out of the
treasury. (R.I. Col. Recs. I, 53, 57, 58, 59, 78.) Still more
interesting is the appointment of four men for the venison trade with
the indians. These "truck masters" are forbidden to give more than
three half pence a pound, "a farthing for each pound being allowed to
the treasury" (Ib. 63) Every inhabitant was ordered to be provided
with one musket, one pound of powder, twenty bullets, two fademes of
match, sword, rest and bandeliers, (Ib. 54) On another occasion every
man was ordered to have by him four pounds of shot and two pounds of
powder. (Ib. 77)
Footnote 11:
The treasurer was directed to pay to the secretary for service done
£19 and 10 acres of land, and to the sergeant £6. In another instance
he is ordered to make a payment of £57 2s. 4d. (R.I. Col. Recs. I, 90,
95) There is no evidence of the payment of the judge and elders, who
were both executive and judicial officers.
Footnote 12:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 87: This is the first statement (if we except the
payment according to allotments ordered at Portsmouth, which was
repealed. See above Note 10.) which we find of a principle that could
serve as a basis of taxation. Another entry which might point either
to payments for lands or taxes is "It is ordered that such as shall
bring in their acquittances from the Treasury to the Judge and Elders
shall have their Lands recorded." (ib. p. 99). That payments for land
were required would seem clear from an order of the General Court of
the inhabitants of Portsmouth and Newport, after the union of the two
towns, directing the "Treasurer to make demands for all such monies as
are due to the Treasurers for the Lands assigned forth to particular
men." (ib. 103)
Footnote 13:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 122: The order directs "that the three shillings a
day allowance be taken off from the Officers." The "Officers" might
imply that all offices were paid, but there has been no mention of
payment except to the secretary and sergeant. It is not unlikely that
the magistrates received fees in their judicial capacity.
Footnote 14:
A committee appointed to examine and balance the accounts of the
treasurers reported that £111, 3s. 4d. was due from the treasury of
Newport. The frequent examinations of accounts which are ordered also
show that financial matters are increasing in importance.
Footnote 15:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 125.
Footnote 16:
This interruption was caused by William Coddington, a citizen of
Newport, who obtained from the Council of State in England a grant to
govern the islands of Rhode Island and Conanicut, with a council of
six men named by the people and approved by himself. The grant was
repealed in Oct. 1652, but mutual jealousies kept the towns apart till
the date given.
Footnote 17:
Government under the Patent was marked by extreme decentralization. At
first all legislative powers remained with the freemen of the towns;
the committee could merely propose measures and declare the decisions
reached by the freemen. The committee, however, tended to become the
legislative body and was regularly established as such on the
resumption of the government in 1654. (R.I. Col. Recs. I, 276 et seq.)
Footnote 18:
No solicitor was elected after 1684.
Footnote 19:
This continued until 1747. Arnold Hist. of R.I. II, 157.
Footnote 20:
There are several instances of laws imposing fines of from £1 to £10
for refusal to bear office. A man could not be compelled however to
bear office for several years in succession. In 1659, an assistant who
had been elected several times was excused from further service, and a
law of 1665, imposing a fine of £5 on constables for refusal to serve,
provided that the same man should not be elected more than once in
three years. By act of 1672, no man need serve as a deputy for two
courts in succession. More than this, a town law, "declared all the
inhabitants, though not admitted freemen, liable to be elected to
office," (Staples Annals of Prov. p. 118) By act of Assembly in 1670,
any person judged capable of holding public office might be elected a
freeman whether he desired it or not. (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 357).
Footnote 21:
The only legislative officers under the Patent who received any pay
were the commissioners from the towns, who were allowed 3s. a day
payable by the towns, with a double fine for absence (R.I. Col. Recs.
I, 307). No salaries appear to have been paid under the charter for
the first few years. In 1666, (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 167) 3s. a day was
granted to all who served in the general assembly or colony court of
trials (except such as had stated fees), payable in the former case by
bills receivable for taxes in the town of the holder and in the latter
case out of the general treasury. The fine for non-attendance was
double the pay. In April, 1672, these salaries were increased, but the
increase was repealed the next month, and in November deputies wages
were fixed at 2s. a day, payable by the town, with a fine of £1 for
non-appearance at the assembly or £2 in case there was no quorum, for
an assistant in the latter case the fine was £5. (R.I. Col. Recs. II,
443, 456, 473) By acts of 1664 and 1666, a like fine had been imposed
on magistrates absent from the court of trials in case of no quorum.
By act of 1680, (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 87) magistrates and deputies
were to be paid out of the general treasury at the rate of 7s. a week.
Perhaps this was a substitute for the act of 1679. This comprises all
the legislation in the records on the subject. There seems to be some
doubt as to the extent of the action of these laws. Arnold (Vol. I,
532) says "Salaries had occasionally been paid to the civil officers,
but most of the time public service had been performed gratuitously."
In any case the imposition of fines for non-attendance must have gone
far to make the system self supporting.
Footnote 22:
The sergeant in particular was a considerable source of expense.
Several times as late as 1664, we find taxes of from £5 to £25 levied
for the payment of his bills, and an act of 1673, recites that the
inhabitants have been "greatly oppressed and grieved" by the
sergeant's "great wages" and that henceforth he shall receive but 3s.
a day for attendance in the general assembly, and simply his fees at
the court of trials, instead of "great fees at the Court of Tryalls,
and four shillings a day, alsoe" as heretofore.
Footnote 23:
A law of 1670, (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 361) provides that for rates
formerly or now ordered the treasurer shall have one shilling in the
pound for all he receives in provisions, but nothing for what he shall
receive in money or for any fines now due the colony, "and what charge
he shall be at he shall be allowed for that besides." In 1671, (ib.
385) it is ordered that for all (in money or other pay) that the
treasurer has received during the last, or shall receive during the
coming, year he shall be allowed twelve pence on the pound. An audit
of 1681, speaks of the treasurer's commissions as 5%. An audit of the
accounts of the treasurer under Andros show that the commission was
10%, and this rate seems to have been continued after the
reestablishment of the colonial government. In the case of the tax
levied in 1679, the towns are ordered to pay the treasurer's salary in
addition to the tax, but as a rule his commission seems to have been
deducted from the receipts.
Footnote 24:
Later the colony, in some instances, made grants to meet the expenses
of certain of the roads and bridges of more than local importance.
Footnote 25:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 222.
Footnote 26:
Ib. 288.
Footnote 27:
This is shown often in the wording of the laws; for example, in the
salary law of 1666. (see p. 97 Note 21) the treasurer is ordered to
make payment "out of those monies which either by fine, forfeiture or
otherwise, are brought into the Treasury," and in the act granting
diet and lodging in 1679, (see ib.) the expense is to be met out of
"the fines and forfeitures due to the Collony." Taxes are not
specified as a source of revenue. The audit reports entered in the
colony account book show the same thing. The decentralization which
marked the government under the Patent is seen in the order "that the
Publick Treasurer shall only receive such fines, forfeitures,
amercements and taxes, as fall upon such as are not within the
liberties" of the four towns. (R.I. Col. Recs. I, 197). An act of 1656
(Ib. 334) provides that all "fines that are committed about ye
Generall Courts, as of juriemen, &c., shall all returne and belong to
ye Generall Treasurie." And in general it was the fines imposed in the
colony courts that were the most fruitful sources of revenue.
Footnote 28:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 223: The towns of Providence and Warwick were to
have each one barrel of powder, five hundred pounds of lead, six
pikes, and six muskets. Portsmouth was to have two barrels of powder,
one thousand weight of lead, twelve pikes, and eighteen muskets;
Newport, three barrels of powder, one thousand weight of lead, twelve
pikes, and twenty-four muskets.
Footnote 29:
A tax of £24 was levied for this purpose in November, 1658, and in the
following May another of £50 (R.I. Col. Recs. I, 395, 416). It is not
quite clear whether or not the second was meant to include the first.
Footnote 30:
Three years later the order had not been complied with. Newport
however had a prison under way. This was adopted as the prison of the
colony and the other towns were ordered to contribute to the cost. The
portion of the law ordering cages to be built was repealed.
Footnote 31:
The claims of Massachusetts, Connecticut and Plymouth included
practically the whole territory of the colony. The claim of
Connecticut up to the bay on the west was not settled until 1703, and
the claim of Massachusetts (which had succeeded to the Plymouth claim)
up to the bay on the east was not settled until 1746.
Footnote 32:
None of this tax was paid for some years, and the whole amount was
never received by Williams (See his letter to the town clerk of
Providence, Jan. 1680-81, printed in the Narragansett Club
Publications, Vol. 6, p. 400) Contributions (amounting it was claimed
to £200) seem to have been taken up in Warwick and Providence to send
Williams on his second agency (See R.I. Col. Recs. I, 234, & II, 78),
but he was obliged to sell his trading house in Narragansett to
support his family during his absence (Arnold I, 239), and he seems to
have been compelled to support himself by teaching while in England
(Arnold I, 251). As he himself expresses it he was "left to starve, or
steal, or beg or borrow." (Letter to Providence R.I. Col. Recs. I,
351). He was also obliged to sell several islands in the bay owned by
him to meet his expenses incurred on his journeys to England (Arnold
I, 105). Clarke seems to have supported himself in part by preaching
and other means. (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 79)
Footnote 33:
It was first attempted to raise the necessary amount by contribution
(R.I. Col. Recs. I, 443). About £40 seem to have been secured this
way. Those who had contributed were allowed to set off their
contributions against their part of the rate.
Footnote 34:
Does not seem to have been fully paid Oct., 1663. (R.I. Col. Recs. I,
506)
Footnote 35:
This tax was collected with the greatest difficulty. Hardly any of it
seems to have been paid for several years. A "great part" remains
unpaid in October, 1669, (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 288) and we find
measures taken for its collection in certain places as late as May,
1671. (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 380-3). In October, 1666, (ditto II, 183)
it is mentioned that "several persons" are "yett behind" in former
rates.
Footnote 36:
Westerly had contributed £65 and was excused from the tax. In May,
1671, (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 380 et seq.) a great portion of this tax
had not been assessed.
Footnote 37:
This was the first percentage tax. In May, 1674, "under severall
pretences few or none paid." (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 521). Some are also
behind in former rates, (ditto 522). So far as shown by the colony
account book, the receipts from this tax amounted to but a few pounds.
Footnote 38:
In May, 1679, several towns had not assessed the rate. (R.I. Col.
Recs. III, 33) An audit in July, 1681, shows that £108 6s. 10d. is due
on this and the rate of 1680, a considerable portion of the deficiency
being for the present tax.
Footnote 39:
The sum was paid down by Stephen Arnold, who was guaranteed by the
notes of several other persons who in turn were to be paid out of the
tax. In June, 1681, certain of those who had given their notes to
Arnold petition for relief, from which it is evident that the tax had
not been paid. The delinquent towns are ordered to pay.
Footnote 40:
For delinquency in payment see notes 38 and 41.
Footnote 41:
The colony account book shows the receipt of but £59, 13s. 10d. up to
September, 1686, from the deficiency of £108, 6s. 10d. (Note 38) and
the present tax. More may have been received for the accounts were
left in an irregular manner, and the custom of offsetting debts due
from the colony against rates may have prevented some payments being
recorded at all. On the other hand it was in the summer of 1686, that
the colony forfeited its charter so that it would not be strange if
the taxes due were not collected.
Footnote 42:
I have been able to find no trace of this tax in the colony records,
but such a tax seems to have been ordered by Andros throughout his
whole jurisdiction, and it is mentioned as levied in Staples Annals of
Providence, p. 177.
Footnote 43:
This tax as assessed in Providence amounted to £37 12s. 3d. of which
£14 was poll money, giving the number of polls assessed as 178. The
number of separate property assessments was 144. In the rate of £120
levied in the same year Providence paid one sixth of the whole. Using
this as a basis of calculation the penny in the pound and poll tax
would have amounted to about £225. The other penny in the pound taxes
do not seem to have yielded quite so much. The three perhaps yielded
about £600.
Footnote 44:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 104-5. Herdsmen or lightermen detained on their
necessary employment were subject to a fine of only 2s. 6d., and
farmers might leave one man at home subject to the same penalty.
Footnote 45:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 153: Provision was also made for archery. Every
person above seven years of age was required to be supplied with bow
and arrows and to practice shooting. (Ibid 186)
Footnote 46:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 372: In 1673, those also were exempted who could
not fight without violating their conscience. A concession to the
Quakers, but the abuse to which the law was subject led to its repeal
a few years later.
Footnote 47:
The arms required by the act of 1647, were "a musket, one pound of
powder, twenty bullets, and two fadom of match, with sword, rest
bandaliers all completely furnished." By act of 1665, in addition to
his arms each man must be furnished with two pounds of powder and four
pounds of lead or shot. (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 117). Under the law of
1677 the requirements were one gun or musket, one pound of powder, and
thirty bullets (Ibid 570). The act of 1665, speaks of the burden on
the poorer citizens in keeping their arms in repair, and ammunition on
hand, and provides that to meet these expenses nine shillings a year
in current pay shall be paid to each enlisted soldier, the necessary
amount to be levied by rate. No future law makes any mention of such
payment and service was probably as a rule without recompense.
Footnote 48:
We have of course no accurate records of the number of the population
at that time. From the data which we do have however it is probably
safe to say that when the four towns came together in 1647, the colony
contained less than one thousand inhabitants, and that the number
gradually increased until at the end of the period, it amounted to
between four and five thousand. The royal commissioners reported in
1665, that the "Colony hath its scattered townes upon Rhode Island,
two upon the maine land, and four small villages" (R.I. Col. Recs. II,
129). By 1678 the towns had increased to nine, at which number they
remained for many years. Certain parts of the colony, as the island
and some of the country in the south and to the west of the bay (the
Narragansett country) seem to have been very fertile. Say the
commissioners above quoted "In this Province also is the best English
grasse, and most sheepe, the ground very fruitfull, ewes bring
ordinarily two lambs, corn yields eighty for one, and in some places,
they have had corne sixe years together without manuring." The
industry of the colony at this period was wholly agricultural and
tended to stock and dairy farming rather than to the raising of grain.
Indeed the colony seems on some occasions to have been dependent on
its neighbors to supplement its own supply of the latter article. The
colonists seem to have been comfortably off, without either great
wealth or great poverty. In Providence estates were of small size (a
few acres), life was on a very humble scale, the inhabitants enjoying
only the real necessities. On the island estates were also small in
size but there was more wealth, and the Narragansett country a few
years later saw the growth of large stock farms and plantations,
sometimes five, six, or even ten square miles in extent, managed by
slave labor. Perhaps the condition of the colony as a whole during the
period from 1647 to 1689, is best summed up in the words of Governor
Ward in a letter to the Board of Trade many years later, "for,
although we were not rich, yet poverty was a stranger among us, till
the year 1710." An excellent picture of the early economic development
of Providence can be found in Dorr's "Planting and Growth of
Providence," published as No. 15 of the Rhode Island Hist. Tracts. A
description of the "Narragansett Planters" is given by Mr. Edward
Channing (Johns Hopkins University Studies, Series IV, No. III). Not
only were the people of that time lacking in wealth according to the
standard of today, but the organization of their economic life was
entirely different from that we now know. Each family possessed a
sufficiency of land, but produced only enough to meet the current
needs of the household. There was no chance for saving, investment and
accumulation; there was no adequate money system. All this would make
a tax fall much more heavily than under our present conditions.
Another circumstance that added to the burden was that taxes were not
levied continuously, a small amount each year, but in considerable
amounts, at intervals of several years. The colony suffered greatly at
the time of Philips war. Warwick and a large part of Providence were
destroyed, the inhabitants taking refuge on the island. All these
considerations must be taken into account in the endeavor to form a
judgment of the burden of taxation during the period.
Footnote 49:
In the letter from Roger Williams to the town clerk of Providence,
already mentioned (note 32) he says that taxation in Rhode Island is
far lighter than in any other colony. He also mentions that the
charter cost about £1,000, while that of Connecticut cost £6,000. The
letter itself is a plea for the more prompt payment of rates.
Footnote 50:
R.I. Col. Recs. II, 505.
Footnote 51:
Ibid III, 13.
Footnote 52:
Ibid III, 162.
Footnote 53:
That these loans or contributions were often only for a few pounds is
expressive of the poverty of the treasury. The occasional reports
entered in the colony account book give us some idea of the financial
transactions of the colony at this time. The amount entered as due the
colony from May, 1672, to May, 1673, was £33, all from fines (£8 from
jurors fines), of which £23 12s. had been received. In August, 1673,
there was reported due £64 14s. 4d. for rates and fines unpaid between
1664 and 1670. The amount expended from May, 1672, to August, 1673,
was £21 6s. 3d. for jury dinners, provisions for the general court
(wine and brandy), for transportation of public officers, for books
for the treasurer, for capturing a prisoner, for support of prisoners,
for hanging prisoners, for messengers to and from Plymouth. The audit
committee in August, report £137 6s. due from the colony. The receipts
entered from October, 1673, to May, 1675, are £125 9s. 10d. of which
£95 is specified as coming from fines, and £3 12s. from rates (the
farthing in the pound rate of 1673), the remainder not being
specified. This may not be the amount actually received, but rather
what was known to be due the treasury, for the amount entered as
expended between May, 1672, and April, 1677, was £101 2s. 3d., the
most important items being as before jury dinners. (£7 1s. 8d.)
criminal matters (£ll 16s. 6d.), carriage of public officers (£2
11s.), general sergeant (£23 1s. O.) general recorder (£17 11s.) The
committee to audit the accounts of Peleg Sanford whose term of office
as treasurer was from May, 1678 to May, 1681, reported payments
amounting to £392 1s. 9d., largely for surveys made in the
Narragansett country, expenses in connection with the boundary line,
and other expenses similar to those previously mentioned. In the
greater part of the payments, however, only the name of the person
paid and not the purpose is given. Some of these payments may have
been on account of expenses in connection with the war. Fines form a
principal element of the receipts, but the principal item was £299
13s. 2d. from the taxes of 1678 and 1680. The expenditures entered
between September, 1681, and September, 1686, amounts to only £82 0s.
11d. largely for jury dinners and payments to the sergeant and
recorder. The audit of the accounts of the treasurer under Andros show
nominal receipts of £213 6s. 8d. from taxes, and expenditures of £232
7s. 1d, the principal items being the court houses and the bounty on
wolves, the purposes for which the taxes were laid, and payment of the
sheriff. (£18 4s.).
Footnote 54:
One of the complaints made against the colony by Bellemont in 1699
was, "They raise and levy taxes and assessments upon the people, there
being no express authority in the charter for so doing." (R.I. Col.
Rec. III, 386). Article IV, Sec. 10, of the present constitution
provides that "The general assembly shall continue to exercise the
powers they have heretofore exercised, unless prohibited in this
constitution," but makes no more definite grant of the right to tax.
It would seem that this right has never been _specifically_ granted to
the assembly.
Footnote 55:
The separation took place in 1696, Arnold I, 533.
Footnote 56:
During the early years of the colony there were several outlying
districts (Block Island, Conanicut, and certain districts which
afterwards became Kingstown and Greenwich) not yet incorporated into
towns. For those places assessors were generally appointed by the
general assembly, collection was by the general sergeant. By 1678,
however, these places had all attained to the dignity of towns.
Footnote 57:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 306: If any person refused to assist an officer in
gathering rates he was to be fined ten shillings.
Footnote 58:
R.I. Col. Recs. I, 227: Those individuals that did not pay their tax
within twenty days were to be liable "in Generall, and each man in
particular x x to the penealtie of the forfeiture of ten pounds,"
imposed by the court of commissioners upon the town for failure to pay
its quota. Both of these provisions are also found in the act ordering
that the magazines be supplied in 1650. (Ibid 223)
Footnote 59:
In the act ordering the erection of prisons in 1655, the assembly
chose three men to make the rate in each town except Newport, for
which four were chosen. Each town was empowered to add to the number,
or to substitute others for those chosen. These same men were to have
the charge of building the prisons. (R.I. Col. Recs. I, 311). The
several acts in regard to the rates of 1662 and 1664, do not prescribe
the machinery of assessment and collection except where extraordinary
measures are adopted as a result of non-payment. In other cases it is
simply ordered that the inhabitants of the towns meet and assess the
rate. It does not seem probable that a full town meeting would
undertake to apportion a rate. It is more likely a committee of
assessors would be appointed for the purpose. The law of 1665,
providing for the military assessment orders the appointment of men to
make the rate. An act of October, 1670, directs each town to choose a
convenient number of persons to make the rate ordered the June before.
After 1678, the records of Providence show that the election of
assessors was customary. They were elected for each tax. It was not
till well into the next century that assessors became regular town
officers.
Footnote 60:
It is probable that in the earlier years each individual was his own
collector, the constable being sent for the rate only on failure to
pay. Before long, however, the constable must have become practically
the collector. A law of June, 1684, provides that all future rates
shall be gathered by the town constables who were to be allowed two
shillings on the pound for their services, and to forfeit double their
fees in case of neglect (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 162)
Footnote 61:
R.I. Col. Recs. II, 510.
Footnote 62:
Taxation according to "strength and estate," as it usually reads, is
the almost unvarying form in which these early colonists expressed
their idea of equality in taxation. It would be difficult to find a
better expression.
Footnote 63:
Payment however must be made in what may be kept in a store house
three months without damage.
Footnote 64:
This is explained as follows, "or that is accordinge to tenn upon the
hundred a yeare forbearance". This and a like reference further on in
the text would seem to show that it was ten per cent interest which
was to be charged on rates not paid when due and that the usual rate
of interest was five per cent.
Footnote 65:
The only case before the time of Andros was the farthing in the pound
tax levied at the time of the passage of the law. Very little seems to
have been received from this tax. The following provision of the law
may afford some explanation. "All rates to be paid in country pay,
accordinge to price of wooll twelve pence a pound; and to vallue their
estates according as it would be worth to pay a debt in old England."
It was added by way of explanation at the next session, "every penny
of English money to be the value of four pence here." From other laws
&c., it appears that the English pound sterling was only a little more
than twice as valuable as the pound of "country pay" so that a
valuation at the rate of four to one would be an undervaluation. And
again, wool was usually received in payment at six or seven pence a
pound so that payment at the rate of wool twelve pence a pound would
be payment in a depreciated currency.
Footnote 66:
It should be noted however that the magistrates were also members of
the councils of the towns in which they lived.
Footnote 67:
It was a common thing to make the rate makers, whether appointed by
the town or the assembly, responsible for the rate in case it was not
made. The same is true for the constables and sergeants in case it was
not collected. The reasons for the non-payment of taxes seem to have
been political rather than economic. All through this period,
particularly in the early part, the central government, as we have
said, was weak and the colony was torn by dissensions. There does not
seem to have been entire harmony between the main land and the island,
and it was in the main land towns and outlying districts that the
greatest difficulty was found in collecting taxes. Warwick protested
strongly against paying her portion of the £600 tax to pay Clarke in
1664, (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 78) claiming that most of the time Clarke
had been merely the agent of the island. If the tax must be levied,
the town prayed that it might be levied on the Indians who had
intruded on their lands and stolen their goods, or by "just fines and
amersements, layd upon such in the Collony as have not only gone
about, but allso have betrayed the Collony." This tax was not
collected in Warwick for six or seven years. There were also internal
dissensions in the towns themselves, particularly in Providence where
the opposing parties seem to have been of nearly equal strength. In
1641, the inhabitants of Pawtuxet, an outlying district of Providence,
submitted to Massachusetts jurisdiction and was not permanently
reunited to Rhode Island until 1658, (Arnold I, 111). Until 1703 the
conflicting claims in Narragansett country continued to interfere
seriously with the exercise of jurisdiction in that country, sometime
rendering it altogether impossible. Another cause which rendered
collection difficult was the custom of offsetting debts due from the
colony against rates. One of the provisions enacted at the same time
with the sedition act was "neither shall any persons plea that the
Collony is in his debt, be of any force or offset to his or their said
rate on that pretence, untill the end be answered for which the rate
is or shall be made." Similar acts were passed on many other
occasions. Nevertheless offsetting rates against debts was customary
and the practice is authorized by a general law of 1684. (R.I. Col.
Recs. III, 165)
Footnote 68:
R.I. Col. Recs. II, 438: The act speaks of "a covetous or ffactious
and mallicious sperritt appeeringe in sundry townes and places of this
Collony; who oppose all or any rates, and thereby prevailinge, by
their deluded adherents in overpowering the more prudent and loyall
partys in such towne and place, to the frustration of the most
necessary and needfull ends for which such rates are levied."
Footnote 69:
Arnold I, 356.
Footnote 70:
It does not seem quite clear whether this provision means merely that
each town should be represented, or that each town should have its
full representation. Arnold (I, 365) thinks the latter. When the tax
of 1673 was levied no deputies are recorded as being present from New
Shoreham (Block Island) or Westerly. The great distance in the one
case and the interference of Connecticut in the other, rendered
attendance from those towns very uncertain and may have caused their
absence to be necessarily disregarded. Only five deputies from Newport
and one from Warwick however are reported as "engaged." This would
make it seem doubtful if a complete representation was actually
required. An act of April, 1678, (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 6.) repealed
this act of 1672, and provided that the general assembly should
consist (as provided in the charter) of the governor or deputy
governor with six assistants, "and soe many of the freemen as shall be
elected in each respective towne, x x x or the major part of them then
present," who should have to make laws and levy taxes, provided
however that no tax should be levied without notice given to each
town, that the "townes may accordingly by their representatives give
their due attendance." A year later the restriction was removed and
the assembly resumed its old powers. (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 53).
Footnote 71:
Arnold II, 502: Under the Andros government (in the case of the per
centage taxes and the £120 tax ordered in December, 1688) a return
seems to have been made to the system of assessment by town councils.
A copy of a warrant, dated July 20, 1687, from John Usher, treasurer
and receiver general of his majesty's revenue in New England, to the
constable and selectmen of Providence is preserved among the papers of
the historical society. The constable is ordered to call a town
meeting for the choice of a "commissioner" who, with the selectmen, is
to make a list of all males over sixteen and "a true Estimation of all
reall & personall Estates," as provided in the act of Andros and
council, and then to assess a poll tax of 1s. 8d. (members of his
majesty's council exempt) and a property tax of a penny in the pound.
The commissioner was then to meet with the commissioners of the other
towns of the county (Rhode Island), when as a body they were to
"examine x x & correct & perfect" the rate lists according to the true
meaning of the act and transmit the result to Usher, together with the
names of the constables in each town to whom warrants for collection
were to be issued. I have not been able to find the act of Andros and
his council here referred to, but it seems to have included the
provisions contained in the warrant and also a table of values at
which the different kinds of property were to be estimated. It is in
these taxes levied by Andros that we first meet with the poll tax
which was soon to become a part of the regular system of taxation
adopted by the colony.
Footnote 72:
These proceedings are to be found in the town records Vol. III, p p.
12-15. A table of values such as that given in the text was not always
adopted when a rate was to be levied, but the rate of assessment seems
often to have been left to the discretion of the assessors. In the
case of the £160 rate of 1684 a committee was appointed to "Consider
what lands may be deemed Rateable." The committee report "That all
Meadowes & Orchards & all other improved lands what so Ever it is yt
is inclosed, is Rateable, and as for Cattell, That all Sorts of
Cattell upward of a yeare old are Rateable," but no table of values is
reported. The number of assessors varied from three to five. They were
prominent men of the community and there was a tendency to reelect the
same individuals for the service. In a list of twenty-two assessors
appointed between 1678 and 1687 there are only eleven different
individuals.
Footnote 73:
The following is the account of the rateable estate of Daniel Abbott,
like Whipple a prominent citizen. "My house & Land at home, & yt in ye
neck that seem to be fenc't, and ye 3d part of a share of meddow in my
Custody wth ye demolished orchard of Tho. walling. 2 Cows, one of them
farrow, a of 3 yeares & vantage steers one horse, & one Maire 5 poor
swine and as oe household-things you may be pleased to vew them
yorselves, we have but one poor bed of or owne Saith Daniell Abbott
Memoorand a yoak of oxen yet." An entry on the back of this list shows
that about 290-1/2 acres of land had been laid out to Abbott, more
than the usual amount it would appear. Much of it was probably wild
land. An entry in the colonial records (II, 415), in 1671, shows us
also the character of property at the time. The inhabitants of
Westerly petitioned the assembly to send thither persons to take an
"inventory of their personal estate." The assembly accordingly
delegated certain persons to "take an exact inventory of the personal
estate of each inhabitant, consisting either of house, household
stuff, goods, cattle, horse kinde, or any other chattels whatever."
Footnote 74:
"The first grand period of Rhode Island history, the formation period,
was ended. The era of domestic strife and outward conflict for
existence, of change and interruption, of doubt and gloom, anxiety and
distress, had almost passed. The problem of self-government was
solved, and a new era of independent action commenced". (Arnold I,
519)
Footnote 75:
The exemption was granted in 1690. (R.I. Col. Recs. III, 274). It
would seem to be uncertain how long it lasted as in 1707 (Ib. IV, 24)
a law is passed exempting the "Governor x x x; his dwelling house" and
its conveniences from taxation during his term of office. The other
legislation during the period in regard to the payment of public
officers was as follows. In 1698, the governor's salary was increased
to £30 and, in 1701, to £40. In addition the assembly in many years
voted him a gratuity, amounting sometimes to as much as his salary. In
1695 deputies were allowed, apparently out of the general treasury,
3s. a day, with a double fine for non-attendance. In 1698, the towns
were ordered to pay the deputies, but in 1703 it was again ordered
that they be paid out of the colony treasury. On account of the
increasing revenue the treasurer's fees were reduced to one shilling
in the pound in 1698, and to six pence in 1705. Before 1702, the
agents were inhabitants of the colony, sent over to England by the
assembly. In that year Penn, then in England, was intrusted with the
interests of the colony. He employed for the purpose a solicitor,
William Wharton, at £40 a year. In March, 1708-9, the assembly granted
Wharton £30 a year additional for past services, to cover expenses,
and appointed him agent for the future with £80 a year salary.
Footnote 76:
It seems to have been intended to send the money to aid other
colonies. In July, 1695, the rate was to a great extent uncollected,
however, and none of it seems to have been applied to the purpose
intended. With the exception of the May and June sessions of 1691, and
August, 1692, no records of the assembly are known to exist, for the
period October, 1690, to July, 1695.
Footnote 77:
During this period however the colony seems to have run into debt,
which was defrayed out of future taxes.
Footnote 78:
The loose way in which the treasury accounts were kept does not permit
us to show exactly how much of the revenue went for each of these
objects. It is possible to make an estimate of some value, however.
After the governor's salary had been increased to £40, and including
the special grants frequently made to him, the payments made to the
legislative and executive officers amounted, probably, to about £150 a
year. The payments made to agents for the period 1695-1710, were
probably not far from £1,000. The whole cost of the civil government,
including the support of the agent, seems on the average not to have
exceeded £500 a year. It was probably under rather than over that
amount. The remainder were military expenditures, the most important
being on account of the expeditions of 1709 and 1710.
Footnote 79:
This census is included in a report, containing quite a full account
of the condition of the colony, sent by Governor Cranston to the Board
of Trade in reply to their inquiries (R.I. Col. Recs. IV, 56). It
probably cannot be depended on for accuracy, and would seem to be
rather an under estimate. Some years before the militia, which is here
given at 1362, had been estimated at 2,000. This however was doubtless
too high.
Footnote 80:
This law had principally to do with the administrative side of
taxation. It was doubtless established by custom that all property was
taxable. The tax law as it stands on the statute book today is hardly
more than administrative; as in 1703, everything is supposed to be
taxable, except what is specially exempted.
Footnote 81:
A committee was appointed to draw up a law for valuing lands and
cattle, and if upon examination it was found that any town had been
overrated a rebate was to be allowed to it out of the next tax. The
committee reported the present law sufficient, and the only additional
legislation at this time was a grant to the magistrates to "regulate
anything appearing defective" in the law, and the provision that the
treasurer of each town should be regarded as the deputy of the general
treasurer.
Footnote 82:
R.I. Col. Recs. III, 300. The magistrates were ordered to call town
meetings "with all expedition for choice of the "three men." It was
further ordered "that there be a Commissioner chosen in each town, to
meet with the men that shall be chosen in each town, to assess the
said rate of two pence per pound, and to adjust the proportions, and
sign with each Committee, and return the same to the General
Treasurer." It will be remembered that there was a tax officer with a
similar title at the time of the Andros government (note 71), His
duties were different from those of the present commissioner. In fact
it is difficult to see how the latter differed from the other three
men referred to. The number of assessors does not seem to have been
definite. In the case of the penny in the pound tax of 1695, the towns
were to choose "two or three" men and the following year they were to
choose as many as they should see fit. In the case of both taxes in
1695, tables were adopted stating the amount of tax to be collected on
certain kinds of personal estate, not the valuation of the estate as
in the table given on page 22. The following is the table adopted for
the penny in the pound tax:
Oxen, four years old and upwards, at three pence per head 00 00 30
Steers, three years old, and all cows at two pence per head 00 00 20
All two year old, a penny per head 00 00 10
All three year old, at half penny per head 00 00 01
All sheep at one year's old and upward, at five pence per 00 00 50
score
All swine above a year old at a half penny per head 00 00 01
All horses and mares above three years old, at three pence 00 00 30
per head
All two years old horses and mares, at one penny per head 00 00 10
All year olds, at a half penny per head 00 00 01
All negro men servants, per head 00 01 80
Negro women servants, per head 00 00 100
It is evident that the property in the above table is taxed on its
value and not on the yearly profit and, in want of further
information, it would be unsafe to infer that the provision for taxing
lands, houses, and trademen according to profit was intended to
introduce anything in the nature of an income tax. What evidence we
have tends to show that the tax was assessed not on profits, but on
the value of the property, in determining which value the yearly
profit was probably the most important consideration.
Footnote 83:
The best account of the commerce of the colony is to be found in the
report to the Board of Trade in 1708, already referred to. (note 74)
The land on the island had been well taken up by this time and the
younger generation in that part of the colony was betaking itself, in
the words of the report, "to trades and callings," especially to
navigation for which their situation so well fitted them. Twenty-nine
vessels were now owned in the colony in place of the four or five of
twenty years before, and all but two or three were owned in Newport.
Ship building also became an important trade, no less than eighty-four
vessels having been built in the colony from 1698 to 1708. Direct
foreign trade existed with the Bermudas, the West Indies, Madeira,
Fayal and Curacoa, the colony sending out lumber, beef, pork, dairy
products, horses, cows, onions, cider, rum, and, sometimes money, and
receiving in return sugar, molasses, cotton, ginger, indigo, pimento,
rum, English goods, Spanish iron, brasalleta, wines, salt and cocoa.
Some of these articles, together with the products of the colony, were
taken to all the coast colonies to the South who gave in return, rice,
pitch, tar, turpentine, valuable woods, skins, flax, pork, grain, and
rigging. With England the colony had no direct trade but received most
of its English goods through Boston, paying for them in dairy products
and money. It was estimated that £20,000 in cash was annually sent to
Boston on this account. It is evident that the colony had entered upon
a new phase in its economic development.
Footnote 84:
The records of Providence do not show but the provision was complied
with.
Footnote 85:
The poll tax as we have seen was introduced under Andros, but does not
seem to have been assessed since his fall. It must be remembered that
the present act was not a general law (see p. 33). How the law of
October, 1699, (note 88) may have affected this question we do not
know. The law of January, 1703-4, is chiefly administrative and makes
no mention of a poll tax, and it would hardly seem to fall under the
law of May, 1704. (Note 90). It seems probable on the whole that the
poll tax was not as a rule assessed. The wording of the law in 1707,
exempting the governor from taxation might seem to imply that a poll
tax was assessed, (see note 75)
Footnote 86:
Indians had been exempted as early as 1672. (R.I. Col. Recs. II, 436)
Footnote 87:
For this law see R.I. Col. Recs. III, 343, et seq. If those appointed
to take account of estates neglected the work they were to be fined
twenty shillings.
Footnote 88:
The most important of the modifying laws seems to have been passed in
October, 1699. It is referred to as the model law in subsequent acts
assessing taxes before January, 1703-4. This law is unfortunately not
preserved in the records, but references go to show that it did not
essentially modify the administrative features of the law of the
previous year. By act of August, 1702, any assistant or justice
neglecting his duty under the act was made subject to a fine of £20.
Footnote 89:
For this law see R.I. Col. Recs. III, 484, et seq. The likeness to the
present law is seen still more fully in some of the details of
administration which have not been changed since that time. Later some
of the towns seem to have been divided into districts and constables
assigned to, and held responsible for, each district. The fine imposed
on an assessor for neglect of duty was 40s.
Footnote 90:
R.I. Col. Recs. III, 501. The oath was as follows: "You A.B., do, on
your solemn engagement, hereby declare the accounts and list as you
present of your estate, is the whole and true account of all your
rateable estate, as to your knowledge you know of (or is in your care
and custody), and this you declare to be the truth, and nothing but
the truth, upon the perill of the penalty of perjury". The same act
declares that what is rateable estate shall be known by the act of
1698. That act contains on the subject only what is given in the
previous pages. I have unfortunately found no return of estates by
individuals for this period, but there is no reason to suppose it
different from what it was before or after; that is, it included
everything with the possible exception of clothes and necessary
household furniture.
Footnote 91:
There were some three or four such returns ordered in all and severe
penalties were sometimes enacted for neglect. Complaints against the
apportionment among the towns do not seem to have been frequent,
though there are one or two instances of dissent on record.
Footnote 92:
As earlier, the difficulty was political rather than economic. There
seems to have been in the colony at this time a party, how strong it
would be difficult to say, in sympathy with the efforts to curtail the
charter privileges. There were also disputes between the towns as to
boundaries, while the colony dispute with Connecticut was not settled
until 1703. In 1700 the sheriff while attempting to collect a tax in
Westerly was carried off to Connecticut. It is worthy of note in
connection with this difficulty of collection that the severity of the
penalty seems to have had little influence. The assessors or
collectors were not infrequently made responsible for the whole tax in
case of neglect, but taxes were not promptly collected until
government had become firmly established and could rely on the united
support of the people. When it was strong enough to enforce the
penalties, the necessity had passed away. In the copy of the laws sent
to Bellemont in 1699, the sedition act (see page 20) seems to have
been included, though repealed nearly thirty years before. The act was
again repealed in March, 1702.
Footnote 93:
The first mention of the constables fees for collection which I have
seen was in 1684, and allowed two shillings on the pound. As long as
this lasted collectors' fees alone eat up ten per cent of the tax, but
by the law of January, 1703/4, the fees were reduced to one shilling.
Assessors were paid by the day, the amount varying from two to five
shillings. The act just referred to placed it at two shillings and six
pence, and a law of 1705 provided that no rate maker should charge for
more than three days. The most full and detailed statement of loss on
the articles in which taxes were paid, is in the accounts of the
treasurer under Andros. It was as follows: Loss by 935 bushels of corn
and rye £20-0-10, by 9 ferkins of butter £1-12-1. Twelve bushels of
corn had been sold and delivered but no payment had been made. In
addition there were the following expenses and losses: Freight £5-3-4,
warehouse room for 1300 lbs. of wool £1, turning corn ten or twelve
times 18s., "275 lbs. of wool taken out of my house £9 3-4." "Money
taken out of Major Goulding's house £32-10-0." As the total receipts
did not exceed £230 it will be seen that expenses and losses eat up a
good part of the revenue. They were in this case probably far larger
than usual, but they must always have been considerable in amount,
while no satisfactory money existed, in quantities sufficient for the
needs of the community.
Footnote 94:
R.I. Col. Recs. III, 357, et seq. The proceeds of the tax were to be
for the poor, highways and bridges. It was indeed a town and not a
colony tax.
Footnote 95:
R.I. Col. Recs. III, 421, et seq.
Footnote 96:
R.I. Col. Recs. III, 438.
Footnote 97:
The amount received as stated in the report on the treasurer's
accounts in 1711, was £2,032-19-2. The amount outstanding on bonds
given for land was £1,523-17-5. Arnold (Vol. II, p. 37, Note) says
that the report of a committee, subsequently made, shows that
£3,795-15s.-10d. was received at the rate of about 1s. 6d. per acre.
Footnote 98:
In 1709, four ferries were leased for seven years at an annual rental
of £4. This is the last record that I find of any payment made to the
general treasury. "Leases" were afterwards spoken of, but these seem
to refer simply to grants of the right of ferriage, bonds being
required for the observance of the law in regard to ferries. In 1748,
the colony purchased two of the ferries but does not seem to have been
successful in its enterprise and sold them again in 1750.
Footnote 99:
In 1837, Mr. E. R. Potter published a pamphlet entitled "A brief
Account of Emissions of paper money made by the Colony of Rhode
Island". It has been reprinted with additions in the "Historical
Sketches of American Paper Currency" (first series) by H. Phillips.
This little work contains about all the facts which are accessible,
including the reports made to the General Assembly, and much that
relates to Massachusetts and Continental money. In 1880, it was
reedited and enlarged by Mr. Sidney S. Rider, and published as number
eight of the Rhode Island Historical Tracts. Mr. Rider has added an
almost complete list of the fac similes of the various issues, but has
omitted other portions which are of more value to the economic
student.
Footnote 100:
Provision was made for sinking these bills by an annual tax of £1,000,
(R.I. Col. Recs. IV, pp. 100, 106, 150) The law however does not seem
to have been vigorously enforced and in some instances the taxes
collected were diverted to other purposes than that intended. Five
payments of this annual tax are entered on the credit side of the
treasurer's accounts, the last being in 1715. In that year the first
bank was issued and the sinking annually of £1,000 of the earlier
bills was one of the purposes to which the interest was to be applied.
The provision was not carried out. No further taxes for the purpose
seem to have been collected. From the manner of keeping accounts at
that time, it is not quite clear whether those taxes entered as
received in the treasurer's books had been actually received in full.
Up to 1715, only £1,102-8s. 6d. had been burnt. As regards the legal
tender character of this and future issues there seems to be some
uncertainty. The bills of the first issue of £5,000 emitted in 1710,
read "This indented bill x x x shall be equal in value to money, and
shall be accordingly accepted by the general treasurer and receivers
subordinate to him, in all public payments". The law as printed in the
colony records (Vol. IV, p. 96) makes no further reference to the
subject of tender, but, as printed in the Digest of 1744, (p. 43)
enacts that the bills "shall be received and paid for the same value
and equal to the current Coin passed in this Colony, for Goods or any
other thing bought or sold in all Payments to be made whatsoever;
(Specialties only excepted)". In the other issues of 1710 and 1711, it
is provided in some cases that the bills shall pass in "all Payments",
in other cases that they shall pass in "all publick Payments" as the
bills of the first issue do. The bills of the bank emitted in 1715,
were declared to be of the same tenor as those of former issues, but
in the same year there was passed an act "making public bills of
credit of this colony, to be lawful pay, on tendering the same for all
bonds and specialties." This caused so much opposition that in the
following year it was repealed and the act declared to extend "to no
other bonds and specialties that what mention current passable bills
of credit of this colony, or of any of the governments of New
England." (R.I. Col. Recs. IV, 210) The other bills emitted up to
1740, were "of the same Tenor" as those previously issued. The act
emitting the bank of 1740, declares the bills equal to silver at 6s.
9d. per ounce and that it "shall be accordingly accepted by the
Treasurer, and the Receiver thereof, in all Payments." (Dig. 1744, p.
230). In the following year 6s. 9d. of this "new tenor" was declared
equal to 27s. of the previous issues or "old tenor", and a sufficient
tender for the same in all payments. Courts of Justice were to govern
themselves accordingly. (Dig. 1744, p. 237). Subsequent issues until
1750, were in accordance with these acts. The most severe of the laws
to enforce circulation was passed in connection with the issue of
March, 1750. (Digest 1752, pp. 86, 99). The act recites that the
depreciation of the bills of credit is due to "illegal Practices" in
"offering from time to time, for Gold and Silver, and Bills of
Exchange, for Sterling Money," larger sums in bills than was stated in
the acts of emission. The new bills were declared equal to silver at
6s. 9d. per ounce--to 16s. "new tenor" and to 64s. "old tenor". Any
person who should receive or pay bills of credit at any higher rate
for gold, silver, or bills of exchange, was to be fined £50 in the new
bills. In case of suits for money due (specialties excepted) the
courts were to make their judgments in accordance with the above
values. Clerks of courts were forbidden to issue execution or process
on any judgment in favor of any person until such person should make
oath that he had not violated the above law. No person could enter a
public office without taking the same oath. Foreigners coming into the
colony to trade were required to take the same oath under penalty of
£50. In August, 1751, (Acts and Laws of Rhode Island 1745-1752, p.
104), probably in accordance with the act of Parliament already
referred to, it was provided that in all debts which should come due,
for every sixty-four shillings appearing to be due in old tenor,
sixteen shillings in new tenor, and six shillings and nine pence in
the present bills, the debtor should pay as much in any of the
afore-mentioned bills as should at the time be worth one ounce of
silver sterling.
Footnote 101:
The expenditure for the year ending June, 1718, was £818-3s.-3-3/4d.
The more important items were as follows:
Public buildings (court house and jail) £206-0-0
Salaries (including £20 for gunner) 180-0-0
Bounties on wolves 62-10-0
Cost of revenue (treasurers' fees) 54-8-4
Agent 66-19-4
Weybosset bridge 30-0-0
The items however vary very much from year to year. The payment for
the wolf bounty is in this year unusually large. In several years the
cost of printing and loaning the paper money is considerable. In the
year 1715, the expenditure for that purpose was about £300. The growth
of the colony necessitated the erection of colony court houses and
jails. Before 1729, however, there were only two counties, the number
being increased to three in that year, and the buildings required were
of a very primitive kind costing as a rule considerably less than
£1,000. The fort was a considerable item of expense; it was rebuilt so
as to be able to mount sixty guns though not much more than half that
number seem to have been supplied. Previous to 1739, £6,000 in bills
were issued to meet the expenses of the fort, and, in the case of
several of the banks, the fort is mentioned as one of the purposes to
which the interest is to be devoted. In 1739, the assembly ordered the
erection of a brick colony house at Newport, which from the
treasurer's accounts appears to have cost over £20,000. The agent
remained a considerable source of expense. Among the papers in the
state house at Providence is preserved the itemized account between
the colony and its agent for the period 1715-1746. The amount
transmitted to the agent during that period was £4,562-15-10 sterling
and there was a balance due of £438-15-5. The agent's salary was only
£40 per annum. The principal expense was incurred in opposition to the
"molasses act" which passed parliament in 1733, and in connection with
the boundary dispute with Massachusetts. The agent also made some
purchases of military stores for the colony. Some of the agent's
charges throw an interesting light on the character of political
methods in England at this time. "To money given Lord Presidents and
other Noblemens Servts. when I waited on them Sundry times about the
committees report x x 6-1-6." Another charge is for a fee given at the
Board of Trade "on the Report for Stores, being in our favor 21-0-0".
In 1720, also the colony sent a special agent to England at an expense
of over £800 in paper money. As regards salaries, I have found no
legislation in regard to that of the governor subsequent to what has
been already mentioned. (Note 75). The treasury reports show that
after 1711, it was customary to grant £100 a year. He also received
gratuities from time to time, in some instances as large as his
salary. In 1729, he received £200 in recompense for all services and
in 1731, £300. The Colonial Records show that like grants were made in
1732, 1736, and 1744. Douglass (in his Summary) writing about 1750,
says that the governor's salary was then £300, and that with
perquisites it did not exceed £1,000. The only explanation of
"perquisites" which I have found is by an act of October, 1732,
(Digest 1744, p. 169) by which the governor is allowed 5s. for each
commission signed, and for taxing Bills of cost 2s. 6d. He also seems
to have enjoyed a share in prizes. About 1715, it became customary to
grant the deputy governor £20 for his year's service. In 1722, his
salary was fixed at £30. Like the governor he was frequently granted a
gratuity, sometimes as large in amount as his salary. In 1736, and
1744, he is allowed £50 and Douglas states his salary as the same as
that of the governor. A law of 1721, granted the assistants a salary
of £10 and the deputies 6s. a day, the latter to be paid by the towns.
By an act of 1746/7 this law was repealed and these officers remained
without pay. By law of 1729, the treasurer was given a fixed salary of
£100 which was doubled two years later. Gratuities were sometimes
granted for the labor entailed by paper money. He was required to give
bonds in £20,000. No other officers received a stated salary. The
payments made to them out of the treasury were sometimes comparatively
large, those made to the secretary in some instances being from £100
to £200.
Footnote 102:
The population at the periods named was as follows, 1730, 17,935;
1748, 32,773; 1755, 40,414; 1774, 59,707. According to the report made
by the governor to the Board of Trade in 1740/1 over one hundred and
twenty vessels were owned by inhabitants of the colony, "all
constantly employed in trade, some on the coast of Africa, others in
the neighboring colonies, many in the West Indies, and a few in
Europe." Accompanying this economic development we find a rapid
progress in wealth as shown in the great increase of comforts and the
introduction of luxuries, and a greater diversification of industries.
Many persons in the middle of the century left personal estates of
from £1,000 to £2,000 in value aside from all real estate. An
excellent and detailed account of this development may be found in
Dorr's Planting and Growth of Providence. R.I. Hist. Tracts, No. 15.
Footnote 103:
These bills were termed "new tenor" in distinction from the former
issues or "old tenor." One shilling of new tenor was declared equal to
four shillings old tenor. Acts and Laws 1744, pp. 226, 230.
Footnote 104:
At the time of this issue an ounce of silver was declared equal to 6s.
9d. of the new bills, to 16s. new tenor and 64s. old tenor. Acts and
Laws 1745-1752, p. 99.
Footnote 105:
In the case of Bank IX repayment was to be made in five annual
installments, interest to be paid until the last installment (Ibid
85). To what extent the interest from these loans was the only source
of revenue can be seen from the following table. The first column
states, for the period given, the average annual amounts received from
interest bonds as shown by the treasury books, and the second column
the total receipts for the same periods, exclusive of money issued to
the treasurer to exchange torn bills. The amounts are all given in old
tenor value.
1716-1728 £1,999 £2,118
1729-1731 3,984 4,082
1732-1733 6,817 6,853
1734 12,000 12,108
1735-1738 10,000 10,249
1739-1741 15,000 15,004
1742-1743 13,200 (1739)
1744 8,200 Direct issues of money
and receipts from taxes,
loans, &c. render
interest money a
comparatively
unimportant source of
revenue after 1739.
1745-1748 14,600 „
1749-1751 9,000 „
1752-1754 18,251 „
1755-1762 11,851 „
1763 9,841 „
1764 7,111 „
1765 4,741 „
The above sums do not include £2,000 emitted in 1728 for use on the
fort. Portions of the bills emitted to exchange torn bills seem to
have been turned from that purpose to meet ordinary expenses. In June,
1726, £46,634 were emitted to exchange £5 and 40s. notes, but only
£30,383 seem to have been applied to that purpose. (See report of
1739, given in Potter's history.) This seems to be the only important
instance.
Footnote 106:
These figures are taken from a report made by Governor Ward to the
Board of Trade (R.I. Col. Recs. IV, 8). It is stated in the same
report that the then value of paper money in silver was 27s. per
ounce. The value of sterling silver is reckoned at 5s. 3d. per ounce.
On this basis the sterling value of the £340,000 would be £77,777,
instead of £88,074. If we estimate the population at 25,000 this would
give a nominal per capita debt of £13 12s. or in sterling £3 2s. or £3
5s., according to the estimate which we adopt, a large amount in
either case. Redemption, it must be remembered however, was to be
accomplished not by taxation by repayment of loans on the part of the
citizens. There is reason to believe the actual amount outstanding
exceeded £340,000. We must also add about £12,000 (nominal) of bills
not loaned but issued directly from the treasury and redeemable only
by taxation. (See text and succeeding note)
Footnote 107:
The first bank expired in 1728 and repayment by ten annual
installments should then have begun. In 1732, £1,066 was due on the
second installment, and none of the third was accounted for (R.I. Col.
Recs. IV, 476). In some instances persons had neglected altogether to
give tenth bonds, as they were called. In 1741, there were five
hundred and forty-nine suits on bonds and mortgages in six towns in
Providence County. In 1742, one thousand and forty more suits were
instituted. The aggregate amount of the latter being only £3,880,
which would show that the bonds were taken up in small quantities.
(Rider's edition of Potter, p. 56). An examination of the accounts of
the grand committee which had charge of these banks shows
approximately the amounts (old tenor value) outstanding at the dates
given. The second column shows the amounts legally outstanding:
August, 1749 £ 459,000 £ 420,000
March, 1750/1 426,000 360,000
February, 1753 398,000 302,000
August, 1759 218,000 120,000
August, 1762 129,000 48,000
In these statements bank IX which amounted to £237,000 old tenor is
not included. All loans should have been repaid in 1767, but a report
of May, 1770, shows that £92,615-15-7 was still outstanding. These
figures of course do not show the exact amount of the bank money in
circulation, but the amount of loans unpaid. Between 1770 and 1775,
there is record of £95,144 old tenor burnt.
Footnote 108:
There are several points not clear in this report. In the first place
it does not agree with the report of 1739, which, from a comparison
with the yearly treasury reports, I believe is correct. The present
report places the amount of bills issued to supply the treasury before
1739, at £106,300, and the amount burnt before that time at £88,329.
In the second place it states the amount of the bills to supply the
treasury, issued between 1739 and 1749, as £206,000 (old tenor value)
whereas the records and treasury reports show £219,600. If we adopt
the report of 1739, to that date, and rely upon the records and
treasury reports after that period we have the following result.
Bills issued to supply the £ 336,611 old tenor value.
treasury previous to 1749
Burnt during same period 194,429
---------
Outstanding January, 1749/50 142,182
Of which there were in the 24,891
treasury
---------
In circulation 117,291 per cap. of population £3 11s.
Sterling Value at 11 to 1 10,663 per cap. of population 6s. 5d.
These bills must be redeemed by taxation. There were also actually
outstanding probably from £430,000-£440,000 of bank money, of sterling
value of about £40,000. Adding these amounts we should have a nominal
per capita debt of £16 15s. sterling £1 10s. 7d. Douglas in his
Summary (p. ) estimates outstanding bills (old tenor value) of the
colonies in 1745, as follows:
Massachusetts £2,466,612
Connecticut 281,000
Rhode Island 550,000
New Hampshire 450,000
A committee petitioning the king against further issues in September,
1750, places the amount outstanding at £525,335. (R.I. Col. Recs. V,
312)
Footnote 109:
In addition to the taxes specifically levied for continental purposes
the state before June, 1779, has paid to the U. S. out of state taxes
£30,000 in accordance with the requisition of congress made in
November, 1777. The £6,000 tax in May, 1781, was to redeem one sixth
of the new continental money issued by the state. £8,640 of the tax of
June, 1783, was appropriated to pay interest on the United States
debt. Of the tax of June, 1784, one fourth was to be paid in United
States interest certificates, and £12,147-6-4 was appropriated to meet
a requisition of congress of the previous April. The whole of the tax
of June, 1785, was afterwards appropriated to pay the interest on the
national debt. But little coin seems to have been received, taxes
probably being paid in evidences of debt. Two facts should be
remembered. 1. These taxes, particularly those assessed after the
close of the war, were not promptly paid. 2. The war expenditures of
the state itself were regarded as national expenditures, the accounts
between the state and the central government to be settled in the
future.
Footnote 110:
Rhode Island bore more than her share of war expenditures see p.
Footnote 111:
In the volume of acts and Laws published in 1730 (p. 42) appears a law
providing that rates should not be applied to any other purpose than
that for which they were levied. Several special enactments to this
effect had been passed during the previous period.
Footnote 112:
Volume of Acts and Laws, 1744, p. 219. Peddling from house to house
had at first been subjected to a tax and finally forbidden altogether
in 1728. A law of 1750, made it lawful for the assessors in any town,
on notice from two freeholders, to enquire into the quantity of
European goods sold by Foreign traders, and assess them "at their
Discretion according to the Largeness of their Trade," for the use of
the town. The assessor not complying was discharged from office. This
law stands in the Digest on 1767 (p. 243) except that the limitation
to "European goods" is omitted.
Footnote 113:
Volume of Acts & Laws published in 1744, p. 295.
Footnote 114:
The three points to be noticed in this law are: 1. the assignment of
fixed and uniform values to the more important kinds of personal
property; 2. the evidence of the beginning of the development of
intangible species of personal property; 3. the use of the tax
machinery to encourage the growth of mercantile pursuits.
Footnote 115:
The Digest of Laws published in 1767, contains no mention of the poll
tax, but, as has been said, its assessment was usual. In the case of
some taxes assessed before 1767, no poll tax was mentioned, and in
some cases when mentioned the amount was not specified. It is probable
however that the poll tax had become an established part of the town
assessment. The limit of age varied in the earlier acts but finally
settled as above stated. The only exemptions were in the case of
settled ministers of the gospel, except during the Revolution when the
exemption was extended to officers and men in the regular army or
naval service. In the tax act of February, 1780, the assessors were
empowered "to consider the circumstances of the Poor, in their
respective Towns, and exempt from the poll tax such as they think
unable to pay the same." This provision was re-enacted in every tax
act until the poll tax was repealed in 1808. In several of the tax
acts during the Revolutionary period the towns were empowered to fix
the poll tax at such sum as they should see fit.
Footnote 116:
Page 219.
Footnote 117:
Schedules March, 1769, p. 2.
Footnote 118:
Schedules June, 1782, p. 27.
Footnote 119:
They first appear enumerated among the regular town officers in the
Digest published in 1767. As a matter of fact they seem to have come
into existence some years earlier.
Footnote 120:
Schedules p. 79.
Footnote 121:
Real Estate in Rhode Island enjoyed peculiar privileges and does not
seem to have been included in property, liable to action by distraint,
unless by special enactment. The first law in regard to lands owned by
non-inhabitants, was passed in February, 1747. (Acts & Laws 1745-1752,
p. 47). It merely recites the difficulty of collecting taxes on such
lands, used only to grow grass, hay, or corn, which was carried away
once a year and authorized distraint on the goods and chattels of the
owner or occupant, corn, hay, or grass, within the same county where
the lands lay. In September, 1757, (Schedules p. 62) it was provided
that unimproved lands owned by non-residents might be sold for
non-payment of taxes. In 1767, the same provision was applied to
unimproved lands owned by non-residents, when not inhabited, and in
October, 1782, (Schedules p. 16) it was extended to all lands owned by
non-residents. An act of May, 1777, authorized the collector to sell
the wood and stone on any unimproved land, the owner whereof resided
in another town and neglected to pay the tax assessed. (Schedules p.
44) After the evacuation of Rhode Island by the British there were
many persons in the island towns possessed of considerable real estate
but very little personal property. In case the latter was not
sufficient to pay the tax on the real estate, the collectors were
authorized to sell so much of the real estate as might be necessary to
pay the tax. (Schedules May, 1781, Sec. Sess. p. 61.)
Footnote 122:
Schedules June, 1756, p. 40.
Footnote 123:
Schedules August, 1763, p. 65. Any town neglecting to pay was to
suffer a fine of double the amount of the tax. Ib. p. 65.
Footnote 124:
July, 1781, p. 6.
Footnote 125:
See tax law in Digest of 1767.
Footnote 126:
Schedules October, 1769, p. 69.
Footnote 127:
Schedules November, 1782, p. 26.
Footnote 128:
Collectors who made distraint were ordered to settle accounts with the
town treasurers once a month (Dec. 1781). Debts due from Great Britain
which do not seem to have been taxed during the war were declared
subject to taxation (June, 1784). One of the dangers of an unsound
financial system is shown in the order forbidding collectors to pay to
the general treasurers taxes, collected by them, in orders on the
state treasury, purchased by the collectors for a sum below their face
value. (May, 1785). To avoid careless methods of accounting collectors
were ordered, if required, to lay before the town treasurer once in
fourteen days a clear statement of the taxes committed to them to
collect, showing that taxes had already been paid. (June, 1788)
Footnote 129:
$4,224,178 in our present money.
Footnote 130:
I have been able to find no returns under this act, nor any further
mention of the act itself. It does not appear in the volumes of Acts
and Laws published in 1730, and subsequently.
CURRICULUM VITAE.
Henry Brayton Gardner was born in Providence, Rhode Island in 1863. He
fitted for college at Mowry and Gregg's English and Classical School,
Providence, Rhode Island. He entered Brown University 1880, and was
graduated with the degree of A.B. in 1884. He entered the Johns Hopkins
University as a graduate student in the Department of History and
Political Science, in 1884; and remained there until 1888, holding the
position of Fellow in History during a portion of the year 1887. Since
1888, he has held the position of Instructor in Political Economy in
Brown University.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES
1. Silently corrected typographical errors and variations in spelling.
2. Archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings retained as printed.
3. Enclosed underlined font in _underscores_.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "History of Taxation in Rhode Island to the year 1790" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.