User:Mafrewinpstcc/sandbox

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

The "whiskey tax" became law in 1791, and was intended to generate revenue for the war debt incurred during the Revolutionary War.

Whiskey Rebellion. (2016). American Governance, American Governance, 2016.

ISBN: 9780028662497

"The series of events collectively known as the Whiskey Rebellion began in 1791, with the passage of the federal Whiskey excise tax, and ended in 1795, when the insurgents convicted of treason were pardoned by President George Washington."

'''Phase 3 '''

Krom, Cynthia L., and Stephanie Krom. “The Whiskey Tax of 1791 and the Consequent Insurrection: "A Wicked and Happy Tumult".” The Accounting Historians Journal, vol. 40, no. 2, The Academy of Accounting Historians, 2013, pp. 91–113, https://pstcc-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/d9b5vv/TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1646328655.

This scholarly article describes the class difference in how small distillers also known as the farmers were impacted way more than the larger distillers. The tax breaks that the large distillers got were completely unfair due to their size. The small distillers think that Hamilton designed the whiskey tax to promote big business and weed out the small business.

Whitten, David O. “An Economic Inquiry into the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794.” Agricultural History, vol. 49, no. 3, University of California Press, 1975, pp. 491–504. https://pstcc-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/d9b5vv/TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1296076239.

The scholarly article states Westerners had no control in comparison to the Easterners. This demonstrates the class difference between the Westerners and Easterners. The westerners had no choice but to use their grain for whiskey. They were not able to sell their grain due to being on the west side of the Appalachian.

Phase 4

Fact 1 Paragraph "Ultimately, the Whiskey Insurrection failed, but manifested long coattails. Other economic forces, primarily the growth of large distillers, doomed the small distiller, many of whom pulled up their roots and headed to Kentucky and Tennessee (hotbeds of whiskey distilling even today). However, commerce and industry in western Pennsylvania grew dramatically, in part due to the presence of the army and the currency it injected into circulation. Within the decade, the Pittsburgh area was "launched on a course that was eventually to make it the 'workshop of the world'" [Baldwin, 1939, p. 265]."

Fact 1 Summary The success of the large distillers deducted the possibilities of the small distillers.

Fact 2 Paragraph "The representation signed Edward Cook Chairman, as on behalf of the four western countries of Pennsylvania, states, that the distance of that part of the country from a market for its produce leads to a necessity of distilling the grain, which is raised as a principal dependence of its inhabitants; which Circumstance and the scarcity of cash combine to render the tax in question unequal, oppressive, and particularly distressing to them."

Fact 2 Summary The Westerners were lead to distill the grain as it became a necessity to the population in order to make money, whereas the easterners could use grain to their preference.

Article Source

Small-scale farmers also protested that Hamilton's excise effectively gave unfair tax breaks to large distillers, most of whom were based in the east. There were two methods of paying the whiskey excise: paying a flat fee or paying by the gallon. Large distillers produced whiskey in volume and could afford the flat fee. The more efficient they became, the less tax per gallon they would pay (as low as 6 cents, according to Hamilton). Western farmers who owned small stills did not usually operate them year-round at full capacity, so they ended up paying a higher tax per gallon (9 cents), which made them less competitive.[20] The regressive nature of the tax was further compounded by an additional factor: whiskey sold for considerably less on the cash-poor Western frontier than in the wealthier and more populous East. This meant that, even if all distillers had been required to pay the same amount of tax per gallon, the small-scale frontier distillers would still have to remit a considerably larger proportion of their product's value than larger Eastern distillers. Small-scale distillers believed that Hamilton deliberately designed the tax to ruin them and promote big business, a view endorsed by some historians.[21] However, historian Thomas Slaughter argued that a "conspiracy of this sort is difficult to document".[22] Whether by design or not, large distillers recognized the advantage that the excise gave them and they supported it.[23] The success of the large distillers deducted the possibilities of the small distillers.

The population of Western Pennsylvania was 17,000 in 1790.[15] Among the farmers in the region, the whiskey excise was immediately controversial, with many people on the frontier arguing that it unfairly targeted westerners.[16] Whiskey was a popular drink, and farmers often supplemented their incomes by operating small stills.[17] Farmers living west of the Appalachian Mountains distilled their excess grain into whiskey, which was easier and more profitable to transport over the mountains than the more cumbersome grain. A whiskey tax would make western farmers less competitive with eastern grain producers.[18] Additionally, cash was always in short supply on the frontier, so whiskey often served as a medium of exchange. For poorer people who were paid in whiskey, the excise was essentially an income tax that wealthier easterners did not pay. The Westerners were lead to distill the grain as it became a necessity to the population in order to make money, whereas the easterners could use grain to their preference.