Washington's Response To The Whiskey Rebellion

Meaning when a tax is placed on a certain item, whiskey, in this demand model the producer, the farmers, would pay most of the tax. At the time the federal government saw whiskey as a luxury and so placed the tax on the distillers, raising the price of production in return decreasing the amount produced. They saw they could pay off their debt, by taxing the whiskey, and the producers of whiskey would pay for the debt for them. Therefore, the National debt incurred during the Revolutionary war and, the supply and the demand of whiskey are related. It was shown that only the distillers who produced less would pay more because of the tradeoff of equity end efficiency, meaning that because of the debt from the war, the government needed a way to pay for the debt and taxed whiskey. Concluding that the supply and demand elasticities of whiskey are completely due to the taxation put on the whiskey to pay for the

Slaughter divides The Whiskey Rebellion into three principal sections entitled Context, Chronology, and Consequence. The first section begins with a comprehensive assessment of the anti-excise tradition which follows late seventeenth-century British philosophy and traces its progression from Walpole's excise battle in 1733, through the Stamp Act crisis of 1764 and on through the Anti-Federalist account of the tax provisions of the Constitution of 1787. In the second section, Slaughter details the debate over the excise, its implementation and the outbreak of both peaceful and violent opposition to it; opposition that occurred not only in Pennsylvania but along the entire frontier. In his final section, and with a trace of personal bias, Slaughter describes the outbreak of violence in the summer of 1794 for which he holds John Neville largely accountable. Slaughter continues in the final section with Hamilton and Washington deciding to make an example of western Pennsylvania despite the fact that the excise had gone uncollected all along the frontier, and the Watermelon Army fiasco which the Federalists

The issues that involved and caused the Whiskey Rebellion was due primarily to major economic and political concerns - westward expansion and a developing government. At the time, many of people were in search of land, and property they could settle on that the recently dismissed British and French could no longer occupy. Available land in the east was diminishing and so in turn, the population begin moving westward. Also, after the Treaty of Paris in 1783 and consequently the end of the American Revolution, created many changes. Lack of authority and resources to affirm authority (Ex. no more mass British army to fight off Indians), had its consequences. Nearly 80 percent of the federal budget was spent battling and removing Indians from the lands along the Ohio River, the most recently settled land by Americans (p.146). In order to compensate for this, Congress passed the tax on whiskey stills which affected mainly poor white farmers. Therefore, westward expansion and the riddance of the Indians, brought forth the infamous Whiskey Rebellion.

(5) In Massachusetts, Daniel Shay led many farmers who were in debt to the courthouse to protest. Many of these farmers had fought in the war and when they came back they were in debt from all the taxes. This was later known as Shay’s Rebellion and since these farmers were in almost every state, state officials were afraid that this uprising would spread. Because of Shay’s Rebellion, the officials wanted to preclude further rebellion from occurring throughout the states. For if it did up rise, they knew their government would look even more unstable from other countries point of view. George Washington’s repartee was that their enemies would be happy to see that they were not able to govern themselves.

In 1791, under the advisement of Alexander Hamilton, congress passed the whiskey tax. This tax, put a twenty-five percent tax on whiskey. Hamilton created this tax in hopes of the federal government gaining more money to help pay of the nation’s debt. However, in doing so, this angered many people, especially farmers in western Pennsylvania, because they distilled the extra grain they had to make whiskey and sell it to make extra income. These small operations in western Pennsylvania rebelled by erecting liberty poles and taring and feathering tax collectors. George Washington, who was president during this time, saw the outburst and decided to take action against the angered farmers. Washington gathered about 13,000 men from the militia to put an end to this rebellion. In doing so, Washington showed that the government help the power over the citizens. In The Whiskey Rebellion, by Thomas Slaughter, he describes different consequences that arise from the whiskey tax. Slaughter presents three main points, which include conflicts between the east and west, two political systems that begin to develop, and the actual rebellion.

Shortly after Alexander Hamilton created the tax on whiskey which was used to pay off the Revolutionary war debt, some farmers started to cause issue in the wilderness. After the tax was passed a group of farmers went out in the woods they captured a tax collector they , stripped him naked, shaved off his hair, poured hot tar all over his body, covered the tax collector in feathers, and finally strapped him to a tree in the middle of the night which caused the rebellion to start. According to “American History: The Whiskey Rebellion: From the August 2014 Issue”,”A group of armed men accosted whiskey tax collector Robert Johnson in a lonely stretch of forest in western Pennsylvania in 1793. They pulled Johnson off his horse and ordered him to strip, cut off his hair, poured hot tar on his body and dumped chicken feathers over the tar.” Then shortly after the tarring, more farmers were joining the Whiskey Rebellion against the whiskey tax.

Following the American Revolution, the American nation and states were faced with enormous amounts of debt. To resolve the economic hardships the new nation had been experiencing, leaders turned to taxation as a source of income to resolve debts. Those who lived in the backcountry, which was isolated from society, were often shocked by the newly imposed taxes and most times resented them. Their resentment in relation to the taxes sparked protests and led to large scale rebellions to express their grievances to the government. Both Shay's rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion were similar in their causes and purpose but they differed in consequences and their significance.

     The Whiskey Rebellion of 1794 helped bring about the demise of the aristocratic Federalist Government in favor of the democratic Republican Government, concerned with the needs of all of its citizens.

The military suppression of the Whisky Rebellion told citizens who wished to change the law that they had to do so peacefully through constitutional means; otherwise, the government would meet any threats to disturb the peace with force. The suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion also had the unintended consequences of encouraging small whiskey producers and other settlers to relocate to the then-frontier lands of Kentucky and Tennessee, which were outside the sphere of Federal control for many years. In these frontier areas, they also found good corn-growing country and smooth, limestone-filtered water to make their whiskey.

Hamilton was able to persuade Congress into passing a twenty-five percent tax increase on such products. This did not go over all too well in the west, especially concerning small farmers in Pennsylvania. At the time, farmers processed their corn and grain into whiskey, since it was less complicated to transport their crops in liquid form rather than in bulk. Whiskey was also used as barter at this time. In retaliation to this tariff, farmers took it upon themselves to harass the federal tax collectors, and showed their hostility and disdain by stopping judicial proceedings. In response to this, Congress attempted to lift the most severe proclamations of the levy, but this was to no avail in the farmers' eyes. Since a majority of the farmers' used the barter system, they simply could not come up with the money necessary to pay the tax. Their vexation mostly stemmed from their belief that the "unresponsive government" lacked to "understand the hardships they faced" since the government quite clearly did not grasp the concept of a deficiency of affluence (Encyclopedia of American History: Revolution and New Nation, 1761 to 1812). Throughout 1771 to 1773, the farmers' resistance was noticeable although not yet notable until 1774, where they then decided to handle the complication themselves.

The Whiskey Excise Tax hit rural farmers especially hard, and they started crying foul almost immediately after passage. It was criticized for being an “unreasonable economic hardship and as an ominous intrusion by central authorities into local affairs” (Gould, 1996, 405). These “westerners” felt as if they were being unjustly victimized by this tax. Most farmers during this period in American history worked extremely hard just to make ends meet, so operating a whiskey distillery offered them a source of extra income. In the minds of these western farmers this tax left them at a competitive disadvantage with eastern farmers. Western small-time farmers generally had small whiskey distillers. These frontier distillers could not run as efficiently as the larger distillers in the east, so their tax burden was much greater. For this reason many of the western farmers felt that Secretary Hamilton had set up a system that was giving tax-breaks to the larger eastern-based distillers. This sentiment is often echoed in today’s world- that the federal government promotes “big business” (Holt, 2004, 30). The cause of much of this rile and frustration, however, stems from the age-old

The Whiskey Rebellion was a tax protest in the U.S that taxed all whiskey products. The President that help set this was George Washington and was the first tax on a product by a new federal government. This tax helped the country's financial problems but the government faced problems like rebellions. The farmers and people rebelled because they felt the tax was unjust and unfair toward them. The government and President Washington responded to this by sending 12,000 soldiers and troops to make farmers stop rebelling. The government showed their power by overpowering the rebellions to help fund national debt. The Federalist party lost support of the people but the lawmakers were happy with the tax because it helped pay off debt. Both The Louisiana Purchase and the Whiskey Rebellion had choices made by the government and the Presidents to help better the government and people for a greater and stronger

Washington signed a bill authorizing Congress to place a tax on distilled spirits. Washington put a tax on the alcohol to help pay off the debts of the war. The colonists were unhappy at first about the tax on their alcohol, but eventually they understood what the tax would be used

Anti-Federalists, as proponents of states’ rights asserted on a dissent that no law should be passed for disarming the people, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals. One Federalist in response to the opposition asserted that “no nation could survive without an effective military, and that there was little danger to be apprehended from such a force when it was controlled by the government in which the people enjoyed full representation” (Cornell 45). Hence, the vast exposure of arms and the easiness to obtain them was jeopardy to the liberty and the safety of the new country. Once people had the right to bear and keep arms for self-defense, they were willing to fight for what they believed and their rights using arms if necessary. For example, the Whiskey Rebellion, a riot caused by the taxes imposed on whiskey and affected farmers from Pennsylvania and Kentucky, was a radical response that the population adhered against the government because they felt that that was their right. A group of farmers decided to oppose the tax imposed on whiskey by force of arms. It stopped being a simple protest and became an armed riot. An armed population out of the control of the government is a Hazard. This idea came up because they were able to possess arms and use them if

He was most appreciated for acting out in ways that the new Constitution was unclear or silent about. Washington’s actions was what established the precedents of the Constitution which are still in use today. In 1794, Washington’s military leadership was put to use when the first revolt was made against the taxes on whiskey. Washington stated that it was his duty “to take care that the laws be faithfully