necessary to mention other causes which existed formerly and do not exist now.
To the sixth: If the quota assigned to New York in October last is wrong, the means proposed by the Commission to make it right are, to say the least of it, very extraordinary. The enrollment upon which its quota was assigned was made in 1863, in pursuance of law, by persons of acknowledged efficiency and honesty, and who are fully indorsed by the Commission itself. It was subjected to close and immediate scrutiny and repeated revision; and although it may be in excess, it is still an enrollment only of men of age to bear arms, and must be more accurate as a basis for present purposes than the population of 1860, which includes men, women, and children, old and young, but excludes the thousands of able-bodied men who have taken up their residences in New York since 1860, and who, in one way or another, are made to go far toward filling New York's quota of troops.
The reasons given by the Commission for its conclusion on this point are, if possible, more extraordinary than the conclusion itself. The first is, that this mode of assigning quotas would be "less favorable to the city and State of New York" than certain other modes discussed. There is no disposition in this Bureau to favor a plan because it is unfavorable to the city or State of New York, nor can I perceive any reason for doing so. The second reason given is that a call for volunteers is in one sense "a tax upon the States and communities; large bounties have to be paid to obtain the men, and States and communities act upon this established fact and by tax compel each man to contribute his share, so that that burden falls upon property as directly as if Congress laid a direct tax for the same purpose. In this respect representative population is a constitutional basis for the apportionment of this burden."
The call of October 17 was not a call for "volunteers" in the sense in which the Commission applies this reason. The proclamation of the President and the instructions issued and information given at the time made this apparent, and the Commission was made aware of it by me through one of its members. It was an announcement of draft intended for January 5 under the enrollment act, and the quotas assigned were quotas for draft, subject to suitable corrections at the proper time. They were announced in advance that the people might have an opportunity to reduce them by volunteering if they desired to do so. The whole scheme was under the enrollment act, and was only a liberal and gentle application of that law. This statement also covers the third reason of the Commission, which is that "in all the acts of Congress thus far passed upon the subject of raising volunteers by calls upon the several States, population has been made the bof July 22, 1861, July 25, 1861, and July 17, 1862, are explicit upon the subject." Fourth reason: "The method adopted will, it is thought, place the burden whore it can best be borne, as a tax to some extent upon property, and produce no hardship anywhere."
As stated above, the "burthen" of October 17 was laid under the enrollment act, which contemplates personal service or an equivalent from every man liable to military duty, and not to levying a tax upon property. There is an inconsistency in the reasoning of the Commission which may here be noticed. It satisfies itself in the first place that an excessive and consequently unjust quota has been assigned