To Alexander Hamilton from Tench Coxe, 30 November 1794
From Tench Coxe
Treasury Department
Revenue-office Novemr. 30th. 1794
Sir
It appears from Inspection of the report of the committee of the Representatives upon the ways and means that they estimated the new Revenues of 17941 to produce as follows.
| 1st The revenue on carriages2 | 150,000 | |||
| 2dly On Stamps, which was not laid by law3 100,000 Dollars. |
— | |||
| 3dly On Sales by auction4 | 100,000 | |||
|
— | |||
| 5thly on loaf and lump Sugars6 | 50,000 | |||
| 6thly on licences to foreign spirits and wines7 | 100,000 | |||
The above Revenues not being concocted at the Treasury, I have not the details of the Estimates, nor are any returns yet received, by which their respective produce can be more certainly stated. It is reasonable to suppose that the licences under the 6th head having been confined to the Venders of foreign Spirits by an alteration of the plan of the Committee,8 the expected Revenue may not be collected.
The returns of the Spirits distilled from foreign materials for during the year ending the 30th June 1794, amg. only Dolls
| to | 174,347 |
| The returns to be received may amount to | 35,653 |
| 210,000 | |
| In 1792 entire the gross Revenue on Spirits from foreign materials was | 354,000 |
| In 1793 entire the gross revenue on Spirits from foreign materials was about | 240,000 |
The fluctuations in the ownership, and agriculture of the Sugar Colonies, and of the intercourse with them, place the supplies of the materials for the manufacture of this spirit upon a footing admitting only of conjecture.
As much duty on Domestic Spirits however, as 400,000 Dolls may accrue in 1795 if the laws can be effectually executed. It is to be observed that the high price of grain has diminished the distillery therefrom, in some of the States, and that fruit is an uncertain Material.
It may be remarked upon the whole that as the country is not only increasing in consumers, but in expensive consumers, and in ability to purchase, the duties on wines, and foreign and domestic distilled Spirits are not likely to fall off materially.
With great respect, Sir, Your most obedient Servant
Tench Coxe
Commissr. of the Revenue
The Secretary
of the Treasury
LC, RG 58, Letters of Commissioner of Revenue, 1794–1795, National Archives.
1. The House of Representatives first considered this committee’s report on January 9–10, 1794. See , IV, 168–69. Various features of the report were debated in the House for the remainder of the session.
2. Duties on carriages were imposed by “An Act laying duties upon Carriages for the conveyance of Persons” ( 373–75 [June 5, 1794]).
3. On May 27, 1794, a bill “laying duties on stamped vellum, parchment, and paper” was defeated in the House of Representatives (, IV, 725–26).
4. This tax was imposed by “An Act laying duties on property sold at Auction” ( 397–400 [June 9, 1794]).
5. On May 17, 1794, “a bill laying certain duties upon manufactured tobacco and refined sugar” was introduced in the House of Representatives (, II, 167). The House agreed to strike out the tax on tobacco on May 23, 1794 (, IV, 716). “An Act laying certain duties upon Snuff and Refined Sugar” became law on June 5, 1794 ( 384–90).
6. See note 5.
7. See “An Act laying duties on licenses for selling Wines and foreign distilled spirituous liquors by retail” ( 376–78 [June 5, 1794]).
8. The bill was presented to the House of Representatives on May 28, 1794, as “a bill laying duties on licences for selling wines, and distilled spirituous liquors by retail” (, II, 183). After the bill passed the House on May 31, 1794, the members resolved that the title should be changed to “An act laying duties on licenses for selling wines and foreign distilled spirituous liquors, by retail” (, II, 190).