First Excise Laws of Pennsylvania Enacted

March 17, 1684

The first excise tax in Pennsylvania was imposed by the Assembly of the Province March 17, 1684, in an act entitled “Bill for Aid and Assistance of the Government.”

This act seems to have been prompted by a record in the minutes of the Assembly for February 20, 1684: “The Govr. & Provll Councill have thought fitt. from the Exteriordinary in the Case, to place Patrick Robinson as administrator to Benj. Acrods Estate, and to have a recourse to this board from time to time.

“Wheras, the Verdict of the Coroner’s Jury was, that Benj. Acrod killed himselfe with drinke, wch might give the Province a pretence to his Estate therin. The Propor & Govr. Relinquished all his Claime 197thereunto in Council, and desired ye Council to take Care that some person be appoynted to take Care of ye Estate of ye sd Acrod, for ye paymt of his debts, and the remaineder to be disposed of according to Law, &c.”

At the session held on March 26 a bill was read that it should be left to the Governor and Provincial Council to discuss with Indians matters concerning the use of rum among them. Another bill was read which prohibited bargains being made “when People are in Drinke.” This bill was passed.

The objectionable features of the first excise bill passed by the Assembly were soon after repealed and not again renewed until the year 1738, when the Provincial Assembly, August 14, heard a bill “sent by the House of Representatives, entitled an Act for laying an Excise on Wine, Rum, Brandy and other Spirits.” This bill was passed without amendments and signed by Lieutenant Governor George Thomas, August 25, 1738.

This bill proved to be very unpopular, and it remained in force only a few months.

In 1744 this subject was again revived when at the session of the Provincial Council held May 25 Lieutenant Governor Thomas in a message sent to him by the Assembly was advised among other things that “We are also of the Opinion that it will be for the Interests of Our Constituents to make further Provision concerning the Excise Act and we have a bill before us to this Purpose; and we hope these Bills, and such others as shall be truly useful to the Province, when offered, will meet with the Governor’s assent. And we, on our Part, shall then Cheerfully make Provision for his Support for the Current Year, equal to any granted for the like Time to either of his immediate Predecessors.”

This bill proposed an excise tax as a means of providing money without resorting to a general tax, not only to be used to purchase arms and ammunition for defense, but as well to answer such demands as might be made upon the inhabitants of the Province by his Majesty for distressing the public enemy in America. This bill, like the former ones, was not long in operation.

March 31, 1764, a bill was passed by the Assembly and Council and signed by Lieutenant Governor John Penn, which tended to suppress “Idleness, Drunkenness, & other Debaucheries, within this Government.”

The attention of the Assembly was once more called to the excise as a productive source of revenue on February 24, 1772, when Lieutenant Governor Richard Penn laid before the Council a bill sent to him by the Assembly, entitled “An Act for the support of the Government of this Province making the Excise on Wine, Rum, Brandy, and other spirits more equal, and preventing Frauds in the Collecting and paying the said Excise.”

That a considerable portion of the money expended in the Provincial 198Government was raised by excise is evidenced from a report made by Governor John Penn June 26, 1775, which was an account of the several amounts of the excise tax collected for the years 1771, 72, 73 and 74, the total amount of which, after deducting the commissions to the Treasurer and collectors exceeded £28,000. Together with this report was another indorsed “State of the Bills of Credit struck on the Excise for several years, laid before the Governor with the bill for the support of Government & paymt of public debts.”

In the Act of 1722 a duty was levied on domestic and foreign spirits. At first, however, as to home-distilled spirits it was not executed, and, indeed, hardly any steps were taken for the purpose particularly in the older counties. But, during the Revolutionary War, the necessities of the State and a temporary unpopularity of distillation, owing to the immense amount of grain consumed, when the troops so much needed it as a food, rendered the collection of duties both necessary and practicable, and a considerable revenue was thereby obtained. Toward the end of the war the act was repealed.

In 1780 Congress resolved that an allowance of an additional sum should be made to the army, to compensate the troops for the depreciation in their pay. This was distributed among the several States for discharge. Pennsylvania made several appropriations for the purpose, but the revenues so applied turned out to be unproductive.

The depreciation fund was always favorably regarded, and upon an application of officers of the Pennsylvania Line, another effort was made, the revenue arising from the excise remaining uncollected was appropriated to this fund, and vigorous measures were taken for its collection.

Great changes, however, had taken place in the disposition of the people since the first imposition of these duties. The neighboring States were free from the burden, and in New Jersey, where a law had been passed for the purpose, its execution had been entirely prevented by a powerful combination. The Pennsylvania law, therefore, met with great opposition, especially west of the Allegheny Mountains and there is no evidence that the excise was ever paid in that section.

The excise law of Pennsylvania, after remaining for years a dead letter, was repealed, and the people were to submit to a similar law passed by the Congress of the new Federal Government March 3, 1791. This laid an excise of fourpence per gallon on all distilled spirits.

The members of Congress from Western Pennsylvania, Smilie, of Fayette, and Findley, of Westmoreland, stoutly opposed the passage of the law, and on their return among their constituents loudly and openly disapproved of it. Albert Gallatin, then residing in Fayette County, also opposed the law by all constitutional methods.

The majority of the people in the western counties of the State were of Scotch-Irish descent. They had heard of the exaction and oppression in the Old Country under the excise laws—that houses were entered 199by excise officers, the most private apartments examined, and confiscation and imprisonment followed if the smallest quantity of whisky was discovered not marked with the official brand. They also remembered the effective resistance to the Stamp Act, that those who forced the repeal of the odious law were the real factors in bringing about the independence of America. Holding these opinions, it is not to be wondered at that the more hot-headed resorted to threats of violence and precipitated the riotous proceedings known in Pennsylvania history as the Whisky Insurrection.