Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-03-23
Eighteenth Congress.
REVISION OF THE TARIFF.
In THEHoUsE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
1a. 1894

In THEHOUSE OFREPREsENTATIvEs,
FEBRUARY 10, 1924.
Mr.. Cambreleng, of New York, rose. He
said it was quite unnecessary to move to strike
ont the enacting clause fthe bill. The motion
now pending involved every principle which
could be urged in favor of that portion of the
bill designed to impose prohibitory or protecting
duties. 1t was not material whether the motion
was to strike out one article or fifty-the argu-
ments were similar-the fate ofthis motion struck
at the principles of the bill as a measure ofpro-
lection. 1t matters not what may be the parti-
Cular condition of any manufacture. The de-
sign of this measure IS to prohibit the importa-
ton OF our manufactured supplies-to confer on
our own capitalists the exclusive privilege of
supplying the country-to extinguish the rove
-nuenow derived from these manufactures and to
supply the deficiency by augmenting the duties
upon other iinportations. This is the character
ofthe measure, and thcse-arc the principles a.
vowed by the Chairman of the Committee on
Manufactures
In the progress ofour free government, said
Mr.. c. it would be well, occasionally, to revert
to the principles upon which it was originally
founded. The time is seasonable, and while we
are ag%itating this grave question about the pc
-culiar forms ofparty, it would be well to attend
something TO the principles of the government,
according to (Which, our national affairs are here
iIS " OO iNO CiSlOu q DC
moro proper for the inquiry-no question can
agitate principles more profound. We may
differ about our measures of defence-we may
cling with devotion to our remnant of state
rights: but the measure now proposed involves
the rights of freemen-the principles of civil
liberty. 1t is not this or that section, which "a
lone is interested. The question extends wher-
sver free government is valued and understood
to the North, the South, the East, and the
Wcst-thc gallant West, where 1 trust, said Mr..
G.. the principles of civil liberty will remain inn
perishable as its glory. Should've sanction by
our acts the principles now advocated, we
should adopt a scheme of government hostile
to the spirit of our institutions, and we shall
probably not long have occasion to discriminate
between forms of government: fer gl.:l-. TIE
generous impulses of chiyalry may be tempting
US abroad to emancipate tue world, passions less
pure and elevated will be secretly undermining
the foundation CT our cwn constitutional iber-
ty.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Buchanan) for whose judgment, said Mr.. C.. I
have a high respect-supposes that we are acting
upon a measure framed according to ancient u
sage-that we are G raduating the scale of en-
enlargement to our manufactures, aud mode
rateiy augmentiug our imposts-that we are
still keeping in view the aggregate interests of
our country and our revenue; and such is the
character of this measure which was anticipated
by the community. But such a measure was
never contemplated by the Committee on Man.
ufactures, nor is any such measure now advocat-
ed by the Chairman of the Committee. The
character of the measure now proposed is pro-
mbitory. The system contemplated, is to be
fashioned after the British model-the bill is
framed for the avowed purpose of granting to
our capitalists the exclusive privilege of supply
ing our country with manufactures to the value
OF millions. Upon the question there is no mid
die ground. The gentlemen from the West are
correct in contending for some reciprocity of
these privileges. If the capital of the East is
to be employed, so must that of the West. The
whole is a scheme CT balanced privileges to ca
p;tal, to borrow an eXpression-ss cutting socie-
ty horizontaliy.n You must take the whole of
it to perfect it. Whatever may be the policy of
a system, so long rejected by intelligence, and
however feasible the balancing these privileges
between the agricultural, manufacturing, and
commercial interests, may have been in Eng
land, the scheme is utterly irDpracticable here
legislative privileges, designed, as they must e.
yer be in the aggregate, to give capital employ
mcnt, must be enjoyed almost exclusively in that
section of the country where it ismostabundant;
at is impossible to execute here any plan of ba-
lanced legislation which can difuse its influence
whatever it be, equally and justly in the agri-
cultural portions of our country. Even the
West must, at all times, share little advantage
from any such legislative compromise. its ope
ration must always be in our country unequal
and unjust; throwing entirely out of view its
weight upon the community.
The honorable Speaker has defied us to shew
a manufacturing branch of industry, which has
fiourlshed without legislative protection. This
cannot be a difficult task, when we see industry
sPrInglng up in every country, and 1ourishing
too, through causes altogether independent of
legislation. But, Sir, what has been the history
of the very manufacture distinguished by that
gentlenan's attention. mean, said Mr.. CT he
cotton manufacture in England. 1t was virtu-
ally prohibited by the act of 1721-it was per.
secuted Tor more than fifty years-because the
raw material was nor a production of the coun-
try, and VERY probably through the avarice of
the linen manufacturers who have always en-
Joyed the special favor aud protection of Parlia.
ment. But these prosecutions, driving genius
to its expedients, produced the labor-sayinr ma
chine. ! refer it to the sagacity of speculative
philosophy to establish, whether the bounty of
Parliament did most injury to the linen, or its
prosecutions most benefit to the cotton msnufac-
ture. Since this discovery, Parliament has done
nothing more than accelerate arevolution in in
dustry, which, through the agency of Mr.. Ark
wright's invention, would have been gradually
but inevitably effected, and in a manner more s-
lutary to the aggregate interests of England,
and less injurious TO previously existing and an
cient establishments.
Much reliance appears to have been placed
upon the feeble influence of our laws. We at
tribute to our act Of 1916, what had been pre-
V1ousiy effected during a long period Of restric