Magenta

Mr. Speaker, I don't see any pressing need for the federal government to address this issue at this juncture. It seems to be more likely to sow division than unity. It would behoove this body to continue development of internal projects such as additional roads, reconsidering our tariffs in light of their effects, and promotion and preservation of our language, rather than focusing upon the slavery issue. I yield.

Jeffrey Franklin has taken The Carolina Statesman national.

The Carolina Statesman, 1792 Newspaper Name: The Carolina Statesman Owners: John McNair, 33%; Jeffrey Franklin, 33%; James Tyson, 33% Editor: Jeffrey Franklin Revenue: $96,000 (96 * 1000) Expenses: $65,450(Total from expenses listed below) Operating Expenses: $48,000 (96,000 * 50%) Editor Salary: $9,600 (96000 * 10%) Connecticut Taxes: $500 (5 * 1000 * 10%) Delaware Taxes: $400 (4 * 1000 * 10%) Georgia Taxes: $600 (6 * 1000 * 10%) Maryland Taxes: $600 (6 * 1000 * 10%) Massachusetts Taxes: $100 (4 * 1000 * 2.5%) New Hampshire Taxes: $300 (3 * 1000 * 10%) New Jersey Taxes: $800 (8 * 1000 * 10%) New York Taxes: $250 (10 * 1000 * 2.5%) North Carolina Taxes: $1500 (15 * 1000 * 10%) Pennsylvania Taxes: $900 (9 * 1000 * 10%) Rhode Island Taxes: $500 (5 * 1000 * 10%) South Carolina Taxes: $700 (14 * 1000 * 5%) Virginia Taxes: $700 (7 * 1000 * 10%) Annual Profit: $30550(96,000 – 65,450) $10,183 to John McNair $10,183 to Jeffrey Franklin $10,183 to James Tyson

The Carolina Company, 1792 Company Name: The Carolina Company Owners: James Masterson CEO: John McNair Revenue: $4,254 FCT (2): $1,322 (661*2) CIT (3): $972 (324*3) NRMR (1): $639 (639*1) AAM (1): $801 (801*1) EMA (5): $565 (113*5) Expenses: -$1,063 Taxes: $425 (4254 * 10% in NC) CEO Salary: $638 (4254 * 15%) Annual Profit: $3,191 (4254 - 1063) $638 to John McNair $3,191 to James Masterson

Mr. Speaker, I think it is an inaccurate assertion made by the member from Rhode Island. It is clear that revenues from the tariffs were sufficient to address our government operations and interest payments on our debt. It was simply the temporary cost of the Residence Act which caused the budget to become imbalanced. Future proposals should keep this in mind. I yield.

Mr. Speaker, I have been, and shall continue to be, vigorously opposed to the concept and implementation of a standing army, as such an entity is a constant threat to order, liberty, and freedom. This, however, being a temporary army for a singular, specific purpose is more reasonable and prudent. I shall support it. I yield.

Aye

Nay to Final Passage

Revolution Continues to Reign in France, Sparking Prussian-HRE Reaction Turmoil and revolution continue to plague the French, with members of their royal family reportedly attempting to flee their country only to be discovered and covered in disgrace. The flight has reportedly caused a marked turn in support for King Louis XVI, with many outside of Paris dismayed at the King's abandonment of reforms and seemingly the abandonment of his duties to the French people. Radical republicanism is spreading throughout that country, alarming French neighbors. King William II of Prussia and Holy Roman Emperor Leopold II made a joint declaration in support of King Louis XVI, calling for the King's freedom and to allow him to return to power. The declaration states that Austria and Prussia will go to war to restore the French king, so long as the other European powers also went to war with France. Despite the unlikelihood of British agreeing to such a war, French revolutions are interpreting the statement as a threat of war. These European affairs are deeply troublesome and we must be on guard against radical Jacobin influence from France. Similarly, we must hold close to our American ideals recently written into the US Constitution. Thus, we must reject the proposal for the establishment of a national army that could be used to entangle us in European wars. State Tax Rates Changing throughout nation: Carolina Embraces Modest Changes, Massachusetts matches New York Tax rates have recently changed in several different states across the country. Massachusetts, benefiting from the tariffs passed in the recent Congress, is electing politicians who attempt to limit economic trade that would aid the southern states. They are also lowering taxes to a fiscally irresponsible 2.5% rate for both businesses and newspapers. It seems impossible that their state, recently matching rates in New York, will be able to afford internal improvements to their roads and government systems. Meanwhile, South Carolina has changed their tax rates in a prudent manner. They have lowered their newspaper tax to 5%, but have raised their business tax to 12%. These changes should afford that state the opportunity to construct new roads and improve existing ones, while also potentially providing funding for a publicly-funded state university, appropriations for Carolina artillery, or further development of local theater culture. It seems certain factions in the northern states, while advocating for a stronger national government, are deliberately weakening the power and influence of state government. Yet in the southern states we are seeing factions that prefer to strike a balance and empower their own states rather than relying solely upon the national government for economic stability. Vermont-New York Impasse May Be Broken A bill in New York recently passed on a vote of 45 Ayes and 43 Nays in the New York Assembly, and it seems likely that the bill will be signed by the Governor. The bill would release that state's claims upon lands in dispute with the Vermont Republic and give those claims to the federal government. However, the federal government would have to enter into negotiations with Vermont, and demand that Vermont provide compensation to the New York government. It also requires one representative from New York be at any such negotiations. If there is a representative from New York at negotiations between Vermont and the United States government, it seems likely that such a representative would cause much consternation and likely destroy diplomatic decorum by demanding too much from Vermont in return for relinquishing the claim. Indeed, depending on the reading of the wording, it seems as if New York would only relinquish their claims to the federal government after the approval of hypothetical negotiations, not before. We also are unaware of Vermont's intentions. Do they even want to join our union anymore? Would any free person want to join a nation, supposedly founded upon ordered liberty, yet seems intent on reckless expansion, centralized armies and monies, and mimicking the behaviors of the European powers? We must reject reckless expansion and the centralized standing armies that many in government are demanding.

Aye to both

John McNair has once again been touring Columbia, although he has changed his proposals. He still advocates for the state funding of cannon-making facilities, although only to increase business taxes to 12%. He continues to advocate for a reduction in newspaper taxes to 5%.

Nay on passage

Nay on passage

Mr. Speaker, NO! I object to the motion for unanimous consent. We do not have the funds to address our debts, let alone a new centralized army. This act proposes redundancies and contradictions of purpose. To have both an 'Army' and a 'National Guard' is clearly a distinction that means one is to be aggressive and the other defensive in nature. We have no need to be aggressive to our neighbors. Aggressive is what has led to Vermont running into the arms of the British Empire, rather to our supposedly freedom-loving republic. If we are to create a nation of free people we can not be re-creating the same institutions that we so recently rebelled against. I yield.

Mr. Speaker, The Southwest Territory Act and Vermont Resolution Act were both recently considered by this body and a vote was held without an announced time, nor was sufficient time given for the vote! Standing precedent in the previous session was both to announce the amount of time given for a vote, as well as holding the vote open for a 72 hour period, which neither of the recent bills was given. Further, vote tallies for both bills were never published, the bills were simply announced to have been passed. This is utterly improper procedure. I motion to reconsider both bills, give a proper allotment of 72 hours for the vote, and have any vote tallies be published after the vote.