From John Jay to Ethan A. Brown, 30 April 1821
To Ethan A. Brown
Bedford—West Chester County—NYork—30 April—1821
Sir
I have recieved, and thank you for the interesting Report of the joint Committee of both Houses of your Legislature, relative to certain proceedings of the Bank of the United States, which you was so obliging as to send to me.1
Controversies between the national and a State Government, or any of their respective Departments, are to be regretted. It is desireable that the one which occasioned this Report, should be brought to an amicable and satisfactory Termination; and that the Limits which bound the authorities of the national and State Governments, be well ascertained and observed.—
However extensive the constitutional Power of a Government to impose Taxes may be, I think it should not be so exercised as to impede or discourage the lawful and useful Industry and Exertions of Individuals. Hence the Prudence of taxing the Products of beneficial Labor, either mental or manual, appears to be at least questionable. Whether Taxation should extend only to Property—or only to Income—or to both—are Points on which opinions have not been uniform. I am inclined to think that both should not be taxed— If the first be preferred, then tax the Land and Stock of a Farmer, but not his Crops— Tax his Milch Cows, but not their Milk, nor the Butter and Cheese made of it; whether the same be sent to market or consumed in his Family— Tax the real and personal Estate of a Physician and a Lawyer, but not the conjectural and varying Profits they derive from the skilful and industrious Exercise of their Professions.—&c &c—2
On this and similar Subjects there will be different opinions— Our Minds are probably as little alike as our Features, and it is not uncommon for men of unquestionable Talents and Candor, to take opposite Sides of the same question— Neither of them being culpable, both are entitled to allowances for the Risque of committing mistakes to which we are all more or less exposed.—
It is an agreable Circumstance that Prosperity attends you; and permit me to add, that for its Continuance and Increase you have the best wishes of Sir your obliged & obt Servt
John Jay
His Excy. E. A. Brown Govr. of the State of Ohio
ALS, NHi (EJ: 10752). Addressed: “His Excellency E. A. Brown / Governor of the State of Ohio / To the care of the Postmaster of Chillicothe / Cincinnati / Columbus OH.” Stamped: “CHILICOTHE / COLUMBUS / 01110.” Notes: “Bedford 2 May”; “ford / [with sums] 25 10 35 2 ½ / 47 ½”. Endorsed: “… no ansr. reqd.” Dft, NNC (EJ: 12812); WJ, 2: 420–21; HPJ, 4: 448–49. Ethan Allen Brown (1776–1852), Connecticut-born, studied law with AH; governor of Ohio (1818–22), senator (1822–25); Democratic-Republican and Jackson supporter.
1. Ohio General Assembly. Ethan Allen Brown, William Doherty, and Richard Collins, Letter from the governor of the state of Ohio to the president of the Senate, transmitting a report of the joint committee of both houses of the General Assembly, on the communication of the auditor of the state upon the subject of the proceedings of the Bank of the United States against the officers of state, in the United States’ Circuit Court.: February 1, 1821. Printed by order of the Senate of the United States (Washington, D.C., 1821). The Ohio legislature had favored taxing the Second Bank of the United States since 1818. Brown signed legislation in 1819 authorizing the seizure of $50,000 each from the Bank of the United States branches in Cincinnati and Chillicothe. State Auditor Ralph Osborn (1780–1835) hired agents, who seized approximately $100,000 from Chillicothe. The abovementioned circuit court case was ruled in favor of the bank, and federal marshals retrieved $98,000 from the state treasury in Columbus. The case in question later evolved into the Supreme Court case Osborn v. Bank of the United States (1824). The Marshall Court found for the bank. See George Knepper, Ohio and Its People: Bicentennial Edition (Kent, 2013), 136–37.
2. Brown’s letter (not found), seems to have asked a legal question on the right of the government to tax. JJ’s response is in line with his concerns about taxes in New York City. See JJ to PAJ, 5 Feb. 1821, above.